Search

On The Christ Myth (Page 1)

Jay wrote:

Hi King David,

I read some of your claims on your site and your debates with Jeffery and Clint.  I have written several apologetic sites about their refute of the copy cat theory, you need to remember yours is also theory just a different view point.  I am well aware how apologetics twist Justin Martyr's writings and expect you will twist and squirm also.  But Justin Martyr an early church father proves beyond a doubt that christianity copied off of earlier pagan sun god myths, fables and tales.  First his excuse was that the devil got there first, you can not deny this no matter how hard you try and twist his writings because he said the devils heard (or read) this from the prophets,the prophets were far earlier than christianity.

He admitted Jupiter (Jove) was virgin born, that he was crucified, resurrected and ascended to heaven,we know that a catholic church in Italy sits on top of a Mithra cavern of Mithra of worship, since it is on top we know Mithraism was first.  Below i will paste a few things Justin Martyr wrote.

Copy and paste of a few Justin Martyr writings>>

Justin Martyr was born around 100 CE, and was a prominent apologist and figure in early Christianity. So much so that he is viewed as being one of the "Church Fathers" - figures in Orthodox Christianity who contributed to the key doctrines, beliefs, and history of the Christian faith.

The following quotes are taken from Justin Martyr's First Apology. In these, Justin Martyr cites links between Greco-Roman paganism and early Christianity.

Here Justin Martyr states that the judgment of Rhadamanthus and Minos, as stated by Plato, would in fact happen by Jesus. In addition, he states that it would happen for the same time period that Plato named.

Ch. 8

Plato, in like manner, used to say that Rhadamanthus and Minos would punish the wicked who came before them; and we say that the same thing will be done, but at the hand of Christ, and upon the wicked in the same bodies united again to their spirits which are now to undergo everlasting punishment; and not only, as Plato said, for a period of a thousand years.

In chapter 18, titled "Proof of Immortality and the Resurrection", Justin Martyr simply cites the beliefs of pagans as evidence that an immortal soul and the resurrection of Jesus was possible and did in fact happen.

Ch. 18

For let even necromancy, and the divinations you practice by immaculate children, and the evoking of departed human souls, and those who are called among the magi, Dream-senders and Assistant-spirits (Familiars), and all that is done by those who are skilled in such matters--let these persuade you that even after death souls are in a state of sensation; and those who are seized and cast about by the spirits of the dead, whom all call daemoniacs or madmen; and what you repute as oracles, both of Amphilochus, Dodana, Pytho, and as many other such as exist; and the opinions of your authors, Empedocles and Pythagoras, Plato and Socrates, and the pit of Homer, and the descent of Ulysses to inspect these things, and all that has been uttered of a like kind. Such favor as you grant to these, grant also to us, who not less but more firmly than they believe in God; since we expect to receive again our own bodies, though they be dead and cast into the earth, for we maintain that with God nothing is impossible.

Justin Martyr compares the beliefs and teachings of Christianity with the poets (those who created the Greek myths), the philosophers, Plato, the Stoics, Meander, and other similar writers.

Ch. 20

If, therefore, on some points we teach the same things as the poets and philosophers whom you honor, and on other points are fuller and more divine in our teaching, and if we alone afford proof of what we assert, why are we unjustly hated more than all others? For while we say that all things have been produced and arranged into a world by God, we shall seem to utter the doctrine of Plato; and while we say that there will be a burning up of all, we shall seem to utter the doctrine of the Stoics: and while we affirm that the souls of the wicked, being endowed with sensation even after death, are punished, and that those of the good being delivered from punishment spend a blessed existence, we shall seem to say the same things as the poets and philosophers; and while we maintain that men ought not to worship the works of their hands, we say the very things which have been said by the comic poet Meander, and other similar writers, for they have declared that the workman is greater than the work.

This one is rather self-explanatory. Justin Martyr simply states that the virgin birth of Jesus, without sexual union, as well as his crucifixion, death, and resurrection were nothing different from the mythology surrounding Jupiter (In Greece, Zeus).

Ch. 21

And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter.

Similar to above, Justin Martyr compares the birth of Jesus and his status as the "Word of God' to that of Mercury, who was also born in a similar way and who was also the "Word of God." He goes on to compare the crucifixion with the lives of the sons of Jupiter, which were on par according to him. Finally concluding by comparing the birth of Jesus with Perseus, and his miracles with that of Aesculapius.

Ch. 22

And if we assert that the Word of God was born of God in a peculiar manner, different from ordinary generation, let this, as said above, be no extraordinary thing to you, who say that Mercury is the angelic word of God. But if any one objects that He was crucified, in this also He is on a par with those reputed sons of Jupiter of yours, who suffered as we have now enumerated.

And if we even affirm that He was born of a virgin, accept this in common with what you accept of Perseus. And in that we say that He made whole the lame, the paralytic, and those born blind, we seem to say what is very similar to the deeds said to have been done by Aesculapius.

Again, this one is very self explanatory. Justin Martyr simply states that Christian beliefs are similar to Greco-Roman mythology.

Ch 24.

In the first place [we furnish proof], because, though we say things similar to what the Greeks say, we only are hated on account of the name of Christ, and though we do no wrong, are put to death as sinners

Now, you might ask yourself, "Why would a notable apologist for the early Christian church admit to all of the similarities and influences between Christianity and Greco-Roman paganism?" Probably because the influences were too strong to cover up or hide.

But alas, like a good apologist Justin Martyr had an excuse. It was what is referred to as "diabolical mimicry" - the notion that the devil or devils knew ahead of time that Jesus was coming, thus setting up pagan religions to thwart the faithful.

Diabolical Mimicry

For having heard it proclaimed through the prophets that the Christ was to come, and that the ungodly among men were to be punished by fire, [wicked demons] put forward many to be called sons of Jupiter, under the impression that they would be able to produce in men the idea that the things which were said with regard to Christ were mere marvelous tales, like the things which were said by the poets.

The devils... said that Bacchus was the son of Jupiter, and gave out that he was the discoverer of the vine, and they number wine among his mysteries; and they taught that, having been torn in pieces, he ascended into heaven. (Referring to Jesus turning water to wine as Dionysus, or Bacchus, did 600 years earlier.)

[The devils] gave out that Bellerophon, a man born of man, himself ascended to heaven on his horse Pegasus. (Reference to Jesus riding into town on an ass.)

And when [the devils] heard it said by the other prophet Isaiah, that He should be born of a virgin, and by His own means ascend into heaven, they pretended that Perseus was spoken of. (Reference to Perseus being born of a virgin before Jesus.)

And when, again, [the devils] learned that it had been foretold that He should heal every sickness, and raise the dead, they produced Aesculapius. (Reference to virtually all of the miracles of Jesus being copies of Aesculapius.)

Mimicry of Baptism

And the devils, indeed, having heard this washing [baptism] published by the prophet, instigated those who enter their temples, and are about to approach them with libations and burnt-offerings, also to sprinkle themselves.

Mimicry of Eucharist

Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;" and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood;" and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn.

Keep in mind that these pagan religions all came first. Justin Martyr is not claiming that they copied Christianity after Jesus came, but that "wicked devils" knew ahead of time of Jesus' coming, and thus set up pre-copies of Christianity.

He makes reference to virtually every rite and doctrine found within Christianity - baptism, Eucharist, virgin birth, crucifixion, water into wine, resurrection.

So, the choice is yours. Is this a clear link between Greco-Roman pagan religion and Christianity; one that documents the influence of the latter on the former - or did DEVILS makes the whole thing up? Let the rational mind decide.

Apologetics like yourself can twist and deny all you want to but it doesn't take a rocket scientist or a twisting by apologetics to very easily see it was christianity who did the copying.The cross and everything in christianity is copied off of ancient sun god tales.If you'd pay attention even your N.T.shows Jesus is a sun god developed by the Roman Empire and later the Roman catholic church,Constantine (325 A.D.)knew he needed a state religion to better govern over the different nationalities he governed over who had many differnt pagan sun god beliefs,christianity was the answer.Your N.T.says Jesus is "The Light of the World".What is the light of the world?Of course the sun is,therefore Jesus is a Sun God not a Son of God.The N.T.says Jesus walked on water look out over a body of water in sunlight or moon light and the reflections seem to show the sun walking on water.Notice Jesus as the light of the world is fighting against the powers of darkness,the powers of darkness is when the sun goes down,the 12 desciples as well as all the other numbers 12 in the Bible is nothing but the 12 signs of the Zodiac.Yes the Zodiac signs were known as far back as the Sumerians the earliest civilization leaving records,which was at least 1200 years before there was a Hebrew (Israelite)nation.Notice how many times the N.T.asks christians to walk in the light and not in darkness.Jesus as a historical flesh and blood person has not one iota of proof or evidence.Jesus was supposedly born early in the first century,i can name over 40 historians and philosophers living and writing then and absolutely none,ZERO,knows one thing about a miracle worker,crucified and resurrected from the dead Jesus.

The copy cat belief (christianity copying paganism) has plenty of evidence from Justin Martyr alone to prove who copied who.I hate to burst your bubble but you worship yet another ancient SUN GOD myth that is Jesus.That is why you have waited for him to return for 2000 years,he hasn't and never will except when the earth rolls over and the sun comes up each morning.Any answers send them to my email address,if you post my emails on your site or someone answers on your site please allow me to respond.

Sincerely,without malice,

Jay

--------------------

I responded:

Jay,

The first problem is the fact that almost all of the "mythicist" claims have no basis in pre-Christian mythology, as anyone who has actually read the mythology can tell you.

The second is that Justin Martyr was not claiming that Christianity copied from pre-Christian mythology, simply admitting that some parallels exist. I can point out the fact that there are parallels between Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy (and do so on my site), but that's not claiming that the story of John F. Kennedy "borrowed" from the story of Abraham Lincoln. JM's point was that the pagans were claiming that what happened to Jesus was impossible, and he was simply pointing out that they also believed in things that one might view as "impossible", meaning it wasn't a good argument against Jesus.

The main problem is that you make a lot of claims in your e-mail that you frankly have no evidence for. You say you can name "over 40 historians and philosophers living and writing" during Jesus' time that didn't mention Him? I'd love to see you do so. And trust me when I say I will fact-check your list (fact-checking usually disproves what mythicists say, which is why they so rarely do so themselves).

You make other claims like that the 12 disciples are based on the 12 signs of the zodiac. What's your evidence for this? Just that they involve the number 12? It's all supposition, and it's a game you can play with just about anything. I've seen people "prove" that Napoleon Bonaparte and the Toronto Maple Leafs hockey team are based on pre-Christian mythology using the exact same methods.

I'm offering up to $1000 to anyone who can provide some kind of evidence for at least half of the mythicist claims for any one deity, and, so far, no one's even made a serious attempt. And I've been offering it for over 3 years now. Will you be the first to provide the evidence that mythicists claim to have? I'd love to see you try. Again, all I'm asking for is HALF of the claims for any ONE deity. The details are here: http://www.kingdavid8.com/Copycat/Challenge.html

Peace,

David

---------------

Jay responded:

Hey David,

You did just what i expected twisted Justin Martyr writings,i really don't mean to use ad homein attacks that apologetics like to claim we do when we disagree with you but it takes pure stupidity to claim that Justin Martyr didn't perfectly say that pagan sun gods with a virgin birth,crucified and claimed resurrected,ascending to heaven and more did not precede christianity.I don't see how you guys can think so dumb.Do you really think that we are not smarter than that?I understand how and why you believe this because i spent 32 years of my life in christianity and i know what causes such idiotic thinking because i had it,it's called biblical mind control,biblical brainwashing and pure blind faith,of course you have a little added to that that being an apologertic and being taught how to twist facts & lie.Justin plainly says the devils either listentned to or read the prophets prophecies and counterfeited it before christianity's Jesus came along.The prophets were long before christianity.

If this is your excuse to keep from paying your crooked $1000.00 offer that's fine i don't need your thousand dollars that you worded your offer in ways to keep from ever paying it.Both denying what Justin actually said and your crooked offer shows what a crooked person you are.Naming your site King David also shows your ego personality trying to make yourself something you are not.As far as the Lincoln comparison to christian parallels you are not the only apologetic that uses this dumb comparison all of you apologetics do,and it has no bearing whatsoever on the Jesus tale.Using Josephus,Tacitus,Suetonius,Pliny and the other claimed proofs of a historical Jesus outside the the 4 gospel claims is also dumb they no more prove Jesus than a rock proves Jesus.Justin Martyr and other church fathers during the second century quoted a lot from Josephus,but none quote any part of the claimed Jesus paragraphs before Eusebiusabout 350 A.D.Justin Martyr had every reason in the world in his efforts to convert pagans to christianity to quote the Jesus paragraph had it been in Josephus writings around 150 A.D.but those paragraphs were not in Josephus writingsin 150 A.D.so he didn't use them.

Early church father Origen said Josephus was not believing in Jesus,Josephus died a believing Jew never,ever would he have writen the Jesus paragraph.Eusebius no doubt added the Jesus paragraph to Josephus around 350 A.D.Eusebius told on himself he said (quote) I have added anything favorable to the church and ommited anything unfavorable(unquote).Eusebius also stated (quote) It is o.k.to lie to further the church,no doubt Eusebius is the culprit who added this Jesus paragraph to Josephus writings seeing that no historian or philosopher of the first century had even mentioned a miracle worker,crucified and resurrected from the dead Jesus.Bible biased scholars,supposed biblical historians and apologetics can lie all you want to it''s an easily proved fraud slipped into Josephus writings.Now let's look at Tacitus,the earliest manuscript claiming to be from Tacitus dates to the 11th.century or 1000 years after it's supposed writing,the first time christianity tried to use the supposed Tacitus paragraph dates to the 15th.century.Did Tacitus write this in about 115 A.D.that is very,very doubtful,WHY?Because this paragraph claims Pontius Pilate was a Procurator,Pilate was a Prefect not a Procurator,Tacitus would have known that were it writen in 115 A.D.The difference between a Prefect and a Procurator is a procurator was financial person,a prefect was a military person which Pilate was.Also this paragraph claimed to be from Tacitus says there were a vast amount of christans in Rome in 64 A.D.that's a lie there was not a vast amount of christians in Jerusalem in 64 A.D.and certainly not a vast amount of them in Rome.So again christian apologetics and scholars twist and don't use their brains trying to use this as proof of a historical Jesus outside the 4 gospels.The 4 gospels are not historical documents as apologetics and christians like to claim,they are religious works.The writers of the 4 gospels are anonymous writers.

Just as their headings show they say "According To"not writen by so and so and none were writen by the desciples and none of the writers claim they themselves were eyewitnesses to the crucifixtion and resurrection they only claim to have heard it from someone unnamed who claim they were eyewitnesses.The church claimed authors(Matthew,Mark,Luke & John) of the 4 gospels were not named untill over 150 years after they were supposedly writen.Now let's look at Suetonius the word used in place of Christ in his writings is the Greek word Chrestus,Chrestus was a common name in Greek then which only meant "Good" or "Good One"and was used in describing even good slaves it doesn't even mean Christ at all.So you guys grab at straws trying to prove a historical Jesus.Just the word christians in old writings does not prove Jesus historical,because we know Paul started the christian religion 50-60 A.D.so of course there were christians.You say i have no evidence,i have plenty but you have none,ZERO proof or evidence of Jesus from the first century when the 4 gospels and N.T.claims he lived on earth.

Even Philo born about 10 B.C.and dying about 45 A.D.who lived all the way through Jesus supposed time and who wrote extensively about the Jewish religion and the area of Galilee knows absolutely nothing about a miracle worker,crucified and resurrected from the dead Jesus.Philo lived part time in Alexandria,Eygpt but traveled to Jerusalem often to visit relatives,you need to do better investigation and research on what you believe.Belief and faith proves nothing.The definition of faith is:Faith is a belief despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.I have evidence it is you who have none.As for as the 40 historians and philosophers writing in the first century who know nothing of Jesus of course Philo is one the others have difficult names to type out it would take a lot of time to type their 40 + names,you claim to have done a lot of biblical research,do your own research they are listed guaranteed.You claim i am only using suppositions,your claim is suppositions because there is not one iota of reliable evidence that the miracle worker,crucified and resurrected Jesus ever walked on this earth as a flesh and blood person.I never expected you pay a $1000.00 for copy cat christianity because no matter the proof and evidence sent i knew you'd deny it.Deny and lie right on but Justin Martyr proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that christianity counterfeited,adopted,copied off of paganism incl.Christmas,Easter,the cross and everything else.The Roman Catholic church copies everything from the Pope's fish hat to rituals and Purgatory from the pagans.Even the names of our days of the weeks and months are named from paganism.I only hate to see you decieve others with the garbage on your site,you can believe what you want but i take offense when you decieve others.

Sincerely,

Jay

----------------------

I responded:

"You did just what i expected twisted Justin Martyr writings,i really don't mean to use ad homein attacks that apologetics like to claim we do when we disagree with you but it takes pure stupidity to claim that Justin Martyr didn't perfectly say that pagan sun gods with a virgin birth,crucified and claimed resurrected,ascending to heaven and more did not precede christianity."

Except he didn't. He never said anything about pre-Christian deities being born of virgins or crucified, and certainly isn't claiming, as you say, that Jesus copied from these deities' stories. All he's trying to do is justify Christian beliefs to pagans, who believe similar things about their own deities. 

"Do you really think that we are not smarter than that?"

I think that anyone who's fallen for this Christ-myth nonsense is incredibly gullible and ignorant of ancient mythology. If you actually read the stories of Horus, Mithra, Krishna, etc. (and they're all easy to find online), you'll see that the vast majority of Christ-myther claims have no relation to the actual stories.

"it's called biblical mind control,biblical brainwashing and pure blind faith"

No, "blind faith" means believing in something that has no evidence to support it. I've read the stories of Jesus and find them convincing. If you don't, that's fine. But if you want me to believe that all of this stuff was part of pre-Christian mythology, then you'll simply have to find me some evidence that it was. Find me the ancient stories where these things happen. Find me the ancient images that back this stuff up. Heck, name a single university-level scholar who agrees with most of these claims, or find me a peer-reviewed journal that has confirmed them.

"If this is your excuse to keep from paying your crooked $1000.00 offer that's fine i don't need your thousand dollars that you worded your offer in ways to keep from ever paying it."

How so? I think my level of evidence is quite reasonable, since I'm asking for stories, images, or confirmation from university-level scholars, peer-reviewed journals, or mainstream web sites. Do you agree that you can't provide evidence for the Christ-myth claims using these sources? If not, why not? Are you agreeing that the stories don't exist?

"Using Josephus,Tacitus,Suetonius,Pliny and the other claimed proofs of a historical Jesus outside the the 4 gospel claims is also dumb they no more prove Jesus than a rock proves Jesus." 

Then you're an incredibly unreasonable person. For rational people, a single historian writing about a person existing in their recent history is evidence for their existence, but you (and every other mythicist I've met) pretends that multiple historians confirming Jesus' existence means absolutely nothing.

"Justin Martyr and other church fathers during the second century quoted a lot from Josephus" 

Justin Martyr quoted from Josephus? What are you talking about? I'm sorry, but whoever told you that was lying to you. Justin Matryr never ONCE quoted from Josephus, as far as I know. This is yet another example of a Christ-myther claim that Christ-mythers have no problem believing since it's convenient for them, but which doesn't stand up to fact-checking.

"Justin Martyr had every reason in the world in his efforts to convert pagans to christianity to quote the Jesus paragraph had it been in Josephus writings" 

And how would quoting Josephus' writings have converted pagans, since Josephus himself wasn't a Christian? How would quoting a non-Christian convert people to Christianity?

 "Early church father Origen said Josephus was not believing in Jesus,Josephus died a believing Jew never,ever would he have writen the Jesus paragraph."

If you're talking about the Testimonium Flavianum, I agree that it was altered, but most scholars agree that it was only partial, that Josephus wrote something about Jesus there, and a later scribe altered it. But even if we get rid of the TF altogether, we still have the reference to Jesus in Antiquities 20, which has no evidence of being altered or added. 

"Did Tacitus write this in about 115 A.D.that is very,very doubtful,WHY?Because this paragraph claims Pontius Pilate was a Procurator,Pilate was a Prefect not a Procurator,Tacitus would have known that were it writen in 115 A.D.The difference between a Prefect and a Procurator is a procurator was financial person,a prefect was a military person which Pilate was." 

And even atheist scholars, such as Richard Carrier, agree that Pilate was both a Procurator and a Prefect. See Carrier pointing it out in this article here: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/jesuspuzzle.html

Besides, the strongly anti-Christian tone of Tacitus' passage makes it very clear that it wasn't written by a Christian.

"Also this paragraph claimed to be from Tacitus says there were a vast amount of christans in Rome in 64 A.D.that's a lie there was not a vast amount of christians in Jerusalem in 64 A.D."

How many were there in Rome, and what's your evidence for it?

"Even Philo born about 10 B.C.and dying about 45 A.D.who lived all the way through Jesus supposed time and who wrote extensively about the Jewish religion and the area of Galilee knows absolutely nothing about a miracle worker,crucified and resurrected from the dead Jesus." 

And how do you know he knew absolutely nothing about Jesus? Do you honestly believe that Philo wrote about every single person he knew of?

"it would take a lot of time to type their 40 + names"

It would take far less time than it took you to compose this letter. Or if you have the list in front of you, why not just copy-and-paste it, which takes very little time at all? The real reason you refuse to type their names out is that you know very well that you can't do it. You heard someone else make a claim that there are 40+ such people, and believed it without bothering to do an ounce of fact-checking, and apparently expected me to do the same. I'm sorry, but we both know that the claim is bogus, and you're just unwilling to admit it. The fact that you believed this claim without bothering to fact-check it, doesn't mean that I'm going to do the same.

"you claim to have done a lot of biblical research,do your own research they are listed guaranteed."

I already have, and thus already know that your claim is bogus. There are not 40+ such people. If you're seriously arguing there are, then feel free to type or copy-and-paste their names. But I recommend that you do a little fact-checking first, since you know darned well that I already have.

"there is not one iota of reliable evidence that the miracle worker,crucified and resurrected Jesus ever walked on this earth as a flesh and blood person" 

Of course there is. Multiple historians wrote about Him, which, to rational people, is evidence for that person's existence. Only irrational people would reject it.

"I never expected you pay a $1000.00 for copy cat christianity because no matter the proof and evidence sent i knew you'd deny it."

You'd think that, if the evidence existed, mythicists would be DYING to share it with the world. Instead, all they ever offer is excuses when asked for it. Even when offered $1000 for it, all you do is offer excuses. Even if you think I'm going to deny it, I promise you that if you offer the evidence for at least half of the claims for any one deity, I will post it to my own website for the world to see. If I rip you off, I'll be doing it quite publicly. I shouldn't have to be offering money for it. It's the burden of those making the claims to present the evidence for it, and I've never seen a mythicist offer evidence for even HALF of the Christ-myther claims for any one deity. Now is the time to "put up or shut up". Offer the evidence. If you refuse to do so, then you have to understand why rational people such as myself refuse to believe in this Christ-myth nonsense. Unless Christ-mythers present the evidence that they claim to have, we will never believe them. If you want to believe evidence-less claims, then I won't stop you. But you can't seriously expect me to do the same.

"I only hate to see you decieve others with the garbage on your site,you can believe what you want but i take offense when you decieve others."

Then show me the evidence for your claims, so that I can post it to my website for the world to see. I've been asking Christ-mythers to do this for years, and all they ever offer me is excuses. If you truly believe I'm wrong, then prove me wrong by offering the evidence. What's stopping you? Even if you don't believe I'll give you the $1000, why not present it for the sake of proving me wrong?

Peace, 

David

----------------------------------

Jay responded: 

I am having company for a couple of days and don't have time to answer your absurdities and twists at least before tomorrow night,but i will answer every one of them one by one.You are a nut case to claim Justin Martyr did not show that pagan Savior sun god's were before christianity,many of your christian sites even say the sun god's were first using Justin's writings that and common sense proves you nothing but a liar.

 Jay

---------------------------------

I responded:

Jay,

Thanks for twisting my words. I'm not saying that Martyr didn't say that pagan savior sun gods were before Christianity, just that he didn't say that Christianity borrowed from them (after all, Jesus obviously wasn't a pagan savior sun god), which is what you were claiming.

Seriously, if you're hoping to convince me that there's anything to this Christ-myth stuff, all you have to do is present evidence for half of the claims for any one deity. If you can't do that, then you're never going to convince ANY rational person that it's anything more than a lot of bull.

David

-----------------------

Jay responded: 

Hi David,

 Actually i never thought i could convince you of anything,you are just like other apologetics you think you already know it all.Did you know it is harder to un-learn something than it is to put it in your head the first time.I spent 32 years in christianity then decided to investigate,research to see if christianity and the Bible were correct,then it took 8 years of long hours researching before i finally rid my mind of biblical mind control,biblical brainwashing and blind faith.I did not want to believe my research,but finally i threw my hands up in disgust and said christianity and the Bible is the biggest conspiracy ever put over on humanity.I am now into my 19th.yearr of research which i still usually do daily.I am glad you got wise enough to admit that the pagan sun gods were before christianity.But you are still not admitting that christianity copied off of pagan sun god,s even though they were first.

Do you realize how silly it is to say what you said below.You said(Quote )I am not saying that Martyr didn't say that pagan savior sun gods were before christianity, just that he didn't say that christianity borrowed from them(unquote.Did you really expect Justin to state that in that way?That is what you infer, with idiotic thinking like that and the rules you have for paying the thousand dollars is not in the least bit dangerous for you.But it is a crooked snake in the grass offer.You changed your mind because you evidently finally saw that Justin did say the pagan sun gods were first.What you need is a course in mythology and how they arrived at their beliefs.You also have another crooked thing in your $1000.00 offer,you want only one sun god to have less than half of the claims made by the 4 gospels and N.T.about Jesus all tied to one sun god.Your small research into Horus,Ishtar and other sun gods is not advanced enough to understand it.I am not claiming like some of the copy cat theoriesdo that the whole list they give of simalarities are all from only one sun god.What i am saying is that you may find one or two things from one sun god similar to the things Jesus did,then go to another sun god and there will be 2 or 3 more similar to the N.T.claim Jesus did but different things than what you found for the first sun god.In other words different nations might have the same sun god but with a different name for him,and different nations had things added to the original story.

Actually it's just like christianity began,the first story about Jesus was that he was born in a cave(it's true you can research it)then it was changed to being born in a manager,Paul wrote before the 4 gospels,the Jesus he knew was not virgin born,the only Jesus he knew was a supposed vision he had on the road to Damascus,most scholars say Mark was the first gospel,then you see Matthew and Luke expanding and adding more to the tale,claiming he was born of a virgin in Bethlehem and all the other garbage they added to a growing Jesus tale.Sun God's had things added by different nations and so their tales grew,no one sun god had all the similarites to the Jesus story,but scattered through out them you can find every thing claimed of Jesus in one or the other sun god claims.Why is that?It is becaise the Roman Empire governed over many different nationalities who had many different sun gods they worshipped,and so Constantine needed a state religion to better govern over the different nationalities,and so christianity and the Roman Empire let them keep their beliefs and customs except changing the name of their sun gods so that they all worshipped the same one to Jesus.And so of course christianty was the copy cat.No not BULL**** as you refuse to finish typing out below, JUST REAL HONEST TRUTH.I will answer your complaints you list below in several other emails probably one subject at a time.

You said:I think that anyone who's fallen for this Christ-myth nonsense is incredibly gullible and ignorant of ancient mythology. If you actually read the stories of Horus, Mithra, Krishna, etc. (and they're all easy to find online), you'll see that the vast majority of Christ-myther claims have no relation to the actual stories. 

And i say i think whoever (in this case you)believes a snake(serpent)spoke the Hebrew language,an ass(donkey)spoke the Hebrew language,the sun stood still to cause a long day,Lot's wife turned into a pillar of salt,the earth and man came into being six to ten thousand years ago,that all those animals,birds,reptiles,insects and either fresh water or salt water fish for the species we have now would fit on an ark that size with enough feed to feed them almost one year,and that 8 people could feed, water and remove excrement daily,and that a virgin had a baby without sexual intercourse,has no reason what ever to pick on Christ mythers.In another email i explained my view about the sun gods,Mithra e.t.c.Again you are wrong on your statements above,christianity copied everything from paganism.Did you just celebrate Christmas?If you did you didn't observe christs birth,you observed a sun god,Sol Invictus which is asscoiated with the winter equinox where the sun seems to die from Dec.22nd.to Dec.25th.the 22nd.is the shortest day of the year(the sun dies) the 25 th.it seemed to the ancient people that it was born again(re-born)resurrected from the dead longer days just like Jesus supposedly did 3 days and 3 nights. 

"Except he didn't. He never said anything about pre-Christian deities being born of virgins or crucified, and certainly isn't claiming, as you say, that Jesus copied from these deities' stories. All he's trying to do is justify Christian beliefs to pagans, who believe similar things about their own deities."

Yes Justin Martyr did say virgin born see below:

And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter.

Do you not think produced without sexual union means a virgin birth,where is your mind?It also says they(pagan gods)were crucified,died,rose again,ascended to heaven and says we propound NOTHING DIFFERENT,that's nothing that what they were already saying about the sons of Jupiter(Jove)Zeus e.t c. That plainly says they were already saying that about Jupiter's sons,god suns of Jupiter.Send the $1000.00,ha. 

"No, "blind faith" means believing in something that has no evidence to support it. I've read the stories of Jesus and find them convincing. If you don't, that's fine. But if you want me to believe that all of this stuff was part of pre-Christian mythology, then you'll simply have to find me some evidence that it was. Find me the ancient stories where these things happen. Find me the ancient images that back this stuff up. Heck, name a single university-level scholar who agrees with most of these claims, or find me a peer-reviewed journal that has confirmed them."

Your Bible says faith is hope for something un-seen(Heb.11:1)something unseen is blindness because you can't see it.You have no reliable evidence,not one historian or philosopher writing from the first century knows one thing about a miracle worker crucified and resurrected from the dead Jesus.Some apologetics like to claim the reason no historian wrote about it is because Jesus was an obscure person from an obscure place,but your own Bible proves them wrong it says multitudes followed him,he was known far and wide,he fed 5000 at one time that's not obscure.And Acts 2:5-11 says every nation under heaven was there at Pentecost,only 10 days after he supposely ascended to heaven.No historian or philosopher would have ever not wrote about a miracle worker who healed people and raised them from the dead and all the earth shaking other things he supposedly did had it actually have happened.Especially when those historians and philosophers wrote about small things like they did.

You have your university educated biblical scholars and apologetics and all they show is a lack of any common sense,they (you)are educated to defend your prec ious Bible even if it means lying, were i you i wouldn't worry about university level scholars if you can't do better than what you've done so far.

I said "Using Josephus,Tacitus,Suetonius,Pliny and the other claimed proofs of a historical Jesus outside the the 4 gospel claims is also dumb they no more prove Jesus than a rock proves Jesus."

Then you said: "Then you're an incredibly unreasonable person. For rational people, a single historian writing about a person existing in their recent history is evidence for their existence, but you (and every other mythicist I've met) pretends that multiple historians confirming Jesus' existence means absolutely nothing."

Evidently you pay no attention to what i send,what i said was that Josephus and Tacitus were frauds,in other words they confirmed nothing,ZERO.In Suetonius i explained what the Greek word Chrestus meant,i didn't comment on Pliny.Try paying attention instead of skimming over what i send like you already know i can't be right.I read yours carefully and try to respond sensibly.

Jay

-------------------------

I responded:

"Did you know it is harder to un-learn something than it is to put it in your head the first time." 

Yes, I'm aware of that, and see it all the time with Christ-mythers. Even when I challenge them to find the evidence for the "parallels" for themselves, and they can't, they still seem to believe that there is evidence for the parallels. I've had a few admit that there were wrong, but the vast majority of them stick to their guns even after they've discovered for themselves that there's no evidence for most of the claims.

"I am glad you got wise enough to admit that the pagan sun gods were before christianity.But you are still not admitting that christianity copied off of pagan sun god,s even though they were first."

Because I've seen no evidence that Christianity copied from them. Unless someone presents evidence for at least half of the parallels for a deity, the argument will never be convincing.

"You said(Quote )I am not saying that Martyr didn't say that pagan savior sun gods were before christianity, just that he didn't say that christianity borrowed from them (unquote). Did you really expect Justin to state that in that way?" 

If someone is trying to use Martyr as evidence that Christianity borrowed from them, then yes. You can't use Martyr as evidence that Christianity borrowed from pre-Christian religions unless Martyr is saying that Christianity borrowed from pre-Christian religions. You don't use a source to provide evidence for a claim that the source disagrees with. That's dishonest.

"You changed your mind because you evidently finally saw that Justin did say the pagan sun gods were first." 

Their being "first" doesn't prove that Jesus borrowed from them. Between "Romeo and Juliet" and "Harry Potter", "Romeo and Juliet" was first. Does that automatically mean that "Harry Potter" borrowed from "Romeo and Juliet"? Of course not. If you wanted to prove that HP borrowed from R&J, you would need to show that there are significant parallels between the stories, give me examples of things that were in R&J that were also in HP. Not just make the claims, but show me the passages. That's why I'm asking Christ-mythers to show me the passages from the Horus, Mithra, etc. stories where those deities are virgin-born, crucified, resurrected, etc. Until they can do so, their claims have no validity.

"You also have another crooked thing in your $1000.00 offer,you want only one sun god to have less than half of the claims made by the 4 gospels and N.T.about Jesus all tied to one sun god." 

No, you can do multiple deities if you want. You just must provide the evidence for at least half of the claims for at least one deity. But if you can't do it for one, them I'm guessing you can't do it for more than one.

"Your small research into Horus,Ishtar and other sun gods is not advanced enough to understand it."

Then feel free to research it yourself and provide the evidence. You clearly haven't actually done so, or you'd already know that most of the claims are bogus.

"What i am saying is that you may find one or two things from one sun god similar to the things Jesus did,then go to another sun god and there will be 2 or 3 more similar to the N.T.claim Jesus did"

So you're saying that of all of the claims that Christ-mythers make for the deities, only a small handful of them are valid? Yes, I'll agree with that. In my research, I've found evidence for maybe 10% of the Christ-myth claims. But if that 10% were enough to "prove" that Jesus copied from those deities, then why have Christ-mythers gone and made up the other 90%? Why would Christ-mythers fabricate so many bogus claims if the handful of valid ones were enough to make the case?

The problem is that you can find a small handful of comparisons between any two stories, real or fictional, if you try hard enough. As I mentioned earlier, you can find parallels between Napoleon Bonaparte and ancient sun gods, but does that mean that Napoleon was a fictional character based on them? Of course not. It doesn't work for Napoleon, and it doesn't work for Jesus.

"Paul wrote before the 4 gospels,the Jesus he knew was not virgin born"

And how do you know that? Are you seriously saying that Paul not mentioning that Jesus was virgin-born means that Paul didn't know it? How so? In our conversation, I have yet to tell you what city I live in, so does that mean that I don't know what city I live in? That's a common Christ-myther fallacy, assuming that a source not mentioning something means that they "didn't know about it". You did it earlier with Philo, and you're doing it again here.

"Sun God's had things added by different nations and so their tales grew,no one sun god had all the similarites to the Jesus story,but scattered through out them you can find every thing claimed of Jesus in one or the other sun god claims."

Again, I need evidence for this, not just claims. Tell me which of those ancient sun gods was crucified, for example. Can you tell me which one, and then show me the story where it happened, or a pre-Christian image of it happening? If not, why do you believe that there were ancient sun gods who were crucified? Until you actually provide evidence for it, you can't seriously expect any rational person to believe it.

There are many things that Christ-mythers claim were borrowed from ancient sun-gods, that they can't find a single example of it actually being part of their story. And, again, you can't expect any rational person to believe something that has no evidence for it.

"Do you not think produced without sexual union means a virgin birth,where is your mind?"

Of course it doesn't. Virgin-born means born of a woman who is a virgin. Even if someone was conceived without sexual union, it's not a "virgin birth" unless the woman was also a virgin, meaning she never had sex at all. "Produced without sexual union" only means that she didn't have sex at the moment of his conception, not that she never had sex at all.

"It also says they(pagan gods)were crucified,died,rose again,ascended to heaven and says we propound NOTHING DIFFERENT,that's nothing that what they were already saying about the sons of Jupiter(Jove)Zeus e.t c."

It means that it was equally miraculous, the same kind of thing. He didn't mean that those exact same details were in those stories. What he's essentially saying is that pagans are silly for rejecting Christianity based on its miracles, when their own stories have miracles as well.

"Send the $1000.00,ha."

Again, you have to provide evidence for at least half of the claims for one of the deities first.

"And i say i think whoever (in this case you)believes a snake(serpent)spoke the Hebrew language,an ass(donkey)spoke the Hebrew language,the sun stood still to cause a long day,Lot's wife turned into a pillar of salt,the earth and man came into being six to ten thousand years ago,that all those animals,birds,reptiles,insects and either fresh water or salt water fish for the species we have now would fit on an ark that size with enough feed to feed them almost one year,and that 8 people could feed, water and remove excrement daily,and that a virgin had a baby without sexual intercourse,has no reason what ever to pick on Christ mythers"

The difference is that we actually have the stories where those things happen. However, the Christ-mythers don't have the stories talking about Horus (and the other deities) being virgin-born, crucified, etc. Meaning that belief in all of that stuff is AUTOMATICALLY more rational than believing in the Christ-myth stuff.

But for the record, I believe much of the OT stories to be parables, not history. Meaning I don't believe that all of the stuff you listed above actually happened.

"Did you just celebrate Christmas?If you did you didn't observe christs birth,you observed a sun god,Sol Invictus which is asscoiated with the winter equinox where the sun seems to die from Dec.22nd.to Dec.25th.the 22nd.is the shortest day of the year(the sun dies) the 25 th.it seemed to the ancient people that it was born again(re-born)resurrected from the dead longer days just like Jesus supposedly did 3 days and 3 nights."

Except if you knew the first thing about the Bible, you'd know that Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection occurred around Passover, which is in April, not in December. Therefore, the three days between the crucifixion and resurrection have nothing to do with December 22-25. Neither did Jesus' birth most likely, since warmer months are suggested by the Biblical texts, since the shepherds are out in their fields tending the sheep, which they usually didn't do in cold winter months. December 25th has absolutely nothing to do with the actual Jesus story, since it was assigned about three centuries later.

Also, whether the sun "stops" for 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or however many days all depends on how slow you consider "stopped". The sun never stops moving north and south, though it certainly does slow as it reached the winter solstice. The big problem is that if you're considering it "stopped" for the three days between the 22nd and the 25th, then it's also "stopped" from the 19th to the 22nd, since it moves just as slowly approaching the solstice as it does moving away from it. Thus the sun wouldn't be "dead" for THREE days, but for SIX days.

Oops!

" Your Bible says faith is hope for something un-seen(Heb.11:1)something unseen is blindness because you can't see it."

I haven't seen Jesus with my own eyes, therefore it's faith. But I have seen the evidence for Jesus' doings in the stories about them, so it's certainly not blind faith. But those who believe in this Christ-myth nonsense have never seen a lick of evidence for most of the claims, so it's blind faith.

"You have no reliable evidence,not one historian or philosopher writing from the first century knows one thing about a miracle worker crucified and resurrected from the dead Jesus."

Again, you're making your same old mistake of assuming that someone not writing about something means that they "didn't know" about it. It's a common Christ-myther fallacy.

"Some apologetics like to claim the reason no historian wrote about it is because Jesus was an obscure person from an obscure place,but your own Bible proves them wrong"

Again, we have several non-Christian historians who wrote about Jesus. The reason they didn't write about His miracles is that they were non-Christians, and thus didn't believe in them. Historians tend not to write about things that they didn't believe happened. But they certainly confirmed His having a brother named James, being executed by Pilate, and having many followers, which is more than enough to establish that Jesus existed.

"No historian or philosopher would have ever not wrote about a miracle worker who healed people and raised them from the dead and all the earth shaking other things he supposedly did had it actually have happened."

Not if they didn't believe it happened, which, being non-Christians, they didn't. But we have plenty of sources in the Bible written by people, in the first century, that believed those things happened, which I find convincing. If you don't, that's fine. But at least I have sources for my claims, unlike Christ-mythers.

"Evidently you pay no attention to what i send,what i said was that Josephus and Tacitus were frauds,in other words they confirmed nothing,ZERO."

Of course you believe they're frauds, since you're so set on disbelieving in Jesus that you'll reject anything written about Him, no matter how good the evidence is. There is no evidence that Josephus' passage in Antiquities 20 was forged, and neither is there any evidence that Tacitus' reference was forged. Yet you want to disbelieve them, so you do.

And I agree with you that Suetonius isn't very good evidence for Jesus, so I never use it as strong evidence. Though it's not because he spelled "Christus" as "Chrestus" (which was a common misspelling, and even occurs in some ancient Bibles), but because he seemed to think Jesus was still around at the time, though He wasn't. However, Josephus, Tacitus and Pliny are more than enough to confirm that Jesus existed, so we do have evidence from multiple historians that Jesus existed, which, to rational people, means that He almost certainly existed. If there was evidence AGAINST His existence, I'd weigh it against these historians. If there was strong evidence against the Josephus, Tacitus and Pliny references, I'd consider that as well. But I have yet to see a lick of evidence against any of this, and I never believe in something for which there is no evidence.

Peace,

David

---------------------

Jay responded:

"And how would quoting Josephus' writings have converted pagans, since Josephus himself wasn't a Christian? How would quoting a non-Christian convert people to Christianity?"

Have you been smoking pot? It would help him convert pagans by quoting the Jesus paragraphs,if they were actually in Josephus writings in 150 A.D.of course they were not in there yet Eusebius added it about 350.A.D.DUM,DUM start thinking a little,your getting on my nerves by causing me to repeat,repeat.I will answer the rest of your absudity nonsense in the morning,i am tire of typing.

JAY

----------------------------------------------------

I responded: 

"It would help him convert pagans by quoting the Jesus paragraphs,if they were actually in Josephus writings in 150 A.D."

 Again, how would the writings of someone who doesn't believe that Jesus was a miracle worker convince pagans that Jesus was a miracle worker? If the early Christians were simply trying to convince the pagans that Jesus existed, then it might have helped, but Jesus' existence wasn't in doubt at the time, so Josephus was useless. All the early Christians were trying to do was convince the pagans that Jesus was a miracle worker, and Josephus' writings said no such thing. Thus they were useless for these purposes. Understand?

(Go on to Page 2)

Please log in to post comments. Not a member? Register. It's free!