What to do about Horus, Mithra and other "Christ stories"?

[Texasgirl]

Oh, and for those that DON'T understand what I am refering to here:

Christmas celibrations
Easter
The carved statues and crosses
'trinity'

'tradition' such as these were NOT offered by Christ or His apostles yet are ACCEPTED as IF THEY WERE. Carved idols came NOT from Christ or God but from PREVIOUS pagan religions. Christmas was a celibration of the ROMANS called Saturnalia that was 'transformed' into Christ's Mass in order to APPEASE the people that may have simply rejected the 'new religion' that ELIMINATED their FAVORITE Holiday of the year. Rabits, colored eggs? Come on. And there is MUCH indication that a 'trinity' existed in Mithraism. And we KNOW that there was NO 'trinity' offered by Christ NOR His apostles or ANYONE ELSE until WELL after the death of Christ.




MEC

I think there will be many here who will be surprised to discover that their belief in the Trinity is a man-made tradition that was accepted from a pagan religion.

Paul warned the Gentiles about returning to their pagan gods. He did not say that any symbol or tradition they had was in itself evil. In fact, James states that "It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. " Pretty limited set of instructions, don't you think? Not that every aspect of your culture is 'intrinisically evil' and you must completely abandon all of it.

This is why when the battles between Christianity and paganism were at their height, the Christian church addressed many of these things head-on. None was more obvious than the setting of the date to celebrate the birth of Christ to directly compete with the most prolific pagan holiday. "Compete" with, not "Merge" with. This is very similar to what you see happening with many churches today with offering an alternative to Halloween by hosting a "Fall Carnival" that maintains a lot of the positive traditions (costumes that are benign, candy, treats, and fun) while rejecting the darker traditions and underlying meaning. I assume you would think there is a problem with that?

A symbol in and of itself is nothing. Its only importance is the meaning it has for those who incorporate it into their religious practice or general life. This is why a Christian woman who chooses to wear a cross necklace (a carved image out of gold or silver or whatever) has no ties to the Egyptian cross symbol and its meaning that pre-dated Christ. It rather serves as a reminder to herself and a witness to others of what that symbol represents to her -- the sacrifice of Christ on the cross for the sake of the redemption of her soul. To strip our lives of all religious symbols because of what they may have meant to somebody else thousands of years ago gives them more power than they are due, and denies us of the ability to incorporate physical reminders and witnesses of our Christian life to others.

 

[Orion]

Thanks for your input, Imagican. Yes, I am aware of other Pagan influences on Christianity, but the OP was about the YouTube video. However, it is just one part of a puzzle that I've been trying to put together to see if the picture really means what it MAY mean. It may not. I don't know. But yes, we can make this thread more broad. I won't be offended if the topic sways from the OP.

 

[GraceBwithU]

Hi all,
Interesting video. I have not research all but I have found at least a couple of things false about the video. For one Krishna is said to have been born between July 19th and 21st. I believe that further research will reveal more errors in this video. If It has mislead once it probably did on other facts it has presented. Also Attis was assigned these attributes in the 2nd centry AD. sounds like a copycat Messiah. What one may find is all of these were actually given these descriptions after Christianity became well know.

 

[cyberjosh]

I think there will be many here who will be surprised to discover that their belief in the Trinity is a man-made tradition that was accepted from a pagan religion.

If the Trinity is Pagan, I must also be a pagan. We already have a thread here which debates the divinity of Christ. Also I personally have created a thread on the Holy Trinity. Jesus is God, that much Scripture is clear about. The Trinity is the only logical conclusion of the co-equavlence of the Father, Son, and Spirit.

~Josh

 

[GraceBwithU]

Horus
It is nearly impossible to distinguish a "true" Horus from all his many forms. In fact, Horus is mostly a general term for a great number of falcon gods, some of which were worshipped all over Egypt, others simply had local cults.

So which one of these forms is the video talking about. Humm....

His most common form is that of falcon-headed man, but he is also shown as a falcon, a lion with the head of a falcon, or a sphinx.

Humm.. not exactly a Messiah....I would recommend staying away from this video. Rubbish. :D :D :wink:

 

[Arj]

Thanks everyone.

 

[Imagican]

while I didn't view the video in reference here, I assumed that it was MORE drivel pointing out the similarities of Egyptian beliefs, Persian beliefs, as compared to Christianity. And MAYBE the possibility that Christianity is simply the 'evolving of the THREE' INTO one? If this IS the case, I've already read it and heard it. If I am mistaken somehow, PLEASE forgive me. But I really don't have time for 'fantasy' stories of this sort. You know, DiVinci Codes and such.

What I was attempting to DO is show that even though Christianity did NOT 'come FROM' these previous pagan religions, these religions may very well have had a bearing on the 'creation' of Christian 'religions' AFTER the introduction of Christ INTO the lives of those that followed such religions as Mithraism. That it is VERY likely that; instead of abandoning their PREVIOUS pagan beliefs, they simply COMBINED the TWO into something DIFFERENT than what had been offered by the apostles OR even through The Holy Spirit.

MEC

 

[Imagican]

And isn't it ironic it was formed by the very folks that nailed Christ to a CROSS?

MEC

That's interesting. I've always been under the impression that the very folks that nailed Christ to the cross was us as the result of our sin, not any particular group of people.

Texasgirl,

That 'sounds' good and Christ DID die for ALL. But Neither YOU nor I were the ones that 'sold Christ out for pieces of silver' NOR were WE the ONE'S that NAILED Christ to the crosss. The Jews ASKED for it and the ROMANS performed this act. REGARDLESS of attempts at mysticism to explain the TRUTH the TRUTH IS that it WAS the Romans that BEAT UPON, SPIT UPON, and then NAILED CHRIST TO THE CROSS.

You are CERTAINLY free to beieve that YOU nailed our Savior to the cross. That IS your peragotive. But the truth of the matter is that Christ submitted to this treatment WILLINGLY and For ALL mankind. But there were those that ACTUALLY NAILED CHRIST TO THE CROSS and ME, myself, was NOT THERE to make such a decision or participate in it. And YOU or anyone else are NOT in a position to decide for ME or anyone other than YOURSELVES WHAT part YOU may or may NOT have taken part in so far as the crucifiction of Christ or ANYONE ELSE.

Christ DIED for ME but I did NOT EVEN HAVE TO ASK. This was OFFERED so you attempting to BLAME everyone for that actual PRODUCTION of His DEATH is ludicrous. He died FOR ME. I DIDN'T KILL HIM. In other words, I DIDN'T TAKE HIS LIFE, for this WOULD HAVE BEEN AN IMPOSSIBILITY, He GAVE ME His life VOLUNTARILY. I didn't HAVE to ask or FORCE Him to DO 'anything' IT WAS A GIFT.

But, someone DID actually NAIL Him to the cross. And it WASN'T the JEWS.....................?

MEC

 

[Imagican]

Still doesnt clear it up for me.I know the Holy Spirit but what am i supposed to believe with all this other stuff?

Arj,

Simply READ The Word and realize that The World will do ANYTHING within it's ability to Hide or Alter the TRUTH. For Satan HAS dominion over this planet and he would LOVE for you to beieve ANYTHING other than the TRUTH.

So, with this in mind, the MOST PRUDENT thing to DO with this type RUBBISH is NOT to expose yourself to it in the FIRST place. For it can offer NOTHING but temptation to depart from 'the truth' and accept the 'wisdom' of men rather than what God HAS offered.

And PLEASE don't get me wrong here. There ARE those that this type of information may have absolutely NO INFLUENCE on. But there are ALSO those that are 'new' to or 'weak' in the Faith that this type 'stuff' CAN have a 'lethal' effect on.

Just like videos such as the Passion. GOOD 'story' but filled with MUCH speculation that one 'unlearned' COULD be able to be influenced into BELIEVING that this IS the 'same story' offered in the the Gospels. Couldn't be FURTHER from the TRUTH.

so Arj, READ The Word and TRUST in God and you will find LITTLE influence POSSIBLE through such videos.

MEC

 

[Texasgirl]

And isn't it ironic it was formed by the very folks that nailed Christ to a CROSS?

MEC

That's interesting. I've always been under the impression that the very folks that nailed Christ to the cross was us as the result of our sin, not any particular group of people.

Texasgirl,

That 'sounds' good and Christ DID die for ALL. But Neither YOU nor I were the ones that 'sold Christ out for pieces of silver' NOR were WE the ONE'S that NAILED Christ to the crosss. The Jews ASKED for it and the ROMANS performed this act. REGARDLESS of attempts at mysticism to explain the TRUTH the TRUTH IS that it WAS the Romans that BEAT UPON, SPIT UPON, and then NAILED CHRIST TO THE CROSS.

You are CERTAINLY free to beieve that YOU nailed our Savior to the cross. That IS your peragotive. But the truth of the matter is that Christ submitted to this treatment WILLINGLY and For ALL mankind. But there were those that ACTUALLY NAILED CHRIST TO THE CROSS and ME, myself, was NOT THERE to make such a decision or participate in it. And YOU or anyone else are NOT in a position to decide for ME or anyone other than YOURSELVES WHAT part YOU may or may NOT have taken part in so far as the crucifiction of Christ or ANYONE ELSE.

Christ DIED for ME but I did NOT EVEN HAVE TO ASK. This was OFFERED so you attempting to BLAME everyone for that actual PRODUCTION of His DEATH is ludicrous. He died FOR ME. I DIDN'T KILL HIM. In other words, I DIDN'T TAKE HIS LIFE, for this WOULD HAVE BEEN AN IMPOSSIBILITY, He GAVE ME His life VOLUNTARILY. I didn't HAVE to ask or FORCE Him to DO 'anything' IT WAS A GIFT.

But, someone DID actually NAIL Him to the cross. And it WASN'T the JEWS.....................?

MEC

And because it was the Romans that actually nailed him to the cross, your conclusion is this is just another piece of 'evidence' of the 'evils' of the RCC?

Yes, there were people who physically nailed Christ to the cross. No, none of us know how we would have responded if we'd been in their place, at that time, in their circumstance. The point is, that was their sin which Jesus died for so they could be redeemed, just as Jesus died for my sins so I could be redeemed. Is their sin somehow worse? Do we know the circumstances of each soldier? Should we not take to heart the words of Jesus for his father to forgive them, "for they know not what they do"? It would seem to me therefore that for those of us who have had the benefit of grace and salvation, who have a much better understanding of sin and "what we do" are in no place to hold them up as somehow worse than us or more responsible for the death of Christ than we are. WE ARE NOT THEIR JUDGE, nor should we attempt to step into Jesus' divinely appointed role to be so. You seem to be of the opinion that physically nailing Christ to the cross is a greater sin than that which any of us might have committed, that it's noteworthy in terms of a discussion, and it has something to do with some perpetual 'lingering' cloud over Rome. I can't see any sound theology in that view at all, but that would certainly just be my opinion.

 

[GraceBwithU]

And isn't it ironic it was formed by the very folks that nailed Christ to a CROSS?

MEC

That's interesting. I've always been under the impression that the very folks that nailed Christ to the cross was us as the result of our sin, not any particular group of people.

Actually, the Jews demanded it, the Romans carried it out. But niether of them is why it happened.

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

John 10:25-26
Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.

These people did not hear or believe because it was God's will for His Son to die for or sins. if they had heard and believed they would never have crucified Him.

God gave His Son and closed the ears of enough people in power to insure the crucifixion would take place. They all acted out of God's will. It was all the will of God because He so loved the world.

John 10:17-18
Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.
KJV

See guys, it wasn't the Jews or the Romans, It was The Father and the Son. The people that carried it out were the instruments in fulfilling God's will.

:wink:

 

[Vic C.]

See guys, it wasn't the Jews or the Romans, It was The Father and the Son. The people that carried it out were the instruments in fulfilling God's will.

Hey MEC, does that sound familiar? :-D

 

[Imagican]

Vic,

It most certainlly does. And I have seen the shows and plays that offer such 'ideas'.

There is little doubt that Christ came to fulfill the Father's Will. But that does NOT alter in the least the fact that there were individuals who actually held the hammers that drove the nails into Christ's body.

As Christ stated to Pilate that he could do NOTHING were it not the Will of God. This does not eliminate the responsibility of Pontius to adhere to The Truth. Simply another example of leaders bending to the will of their followers. Does this alter 'right' or 'wrong' decisions? Not likely.

Christ died for ALL. But it is never offered that we ALL killed Christ. For the act of His death was a 'gift' GIVEN, not something that we were able to TAKE. For if the scenario offered in 'us killing Christ ourselves' were to be true; Christ would have had no need to offer the words of forgiveness that are written in The Word; "Forgive them Father for they know not what they do". These were not offered in defense of you or me Vic, but for those that had 'chosen' to have Christ put to death and actually performed this act.

Just as Judas, (or someone) HAD to betray Christ, that does NOT alter the FACT that the betrayal was indeed an atrocious act that the one performing must certainly be held responsible for. Woe to the one actually 'betrayed' Christ with the 'kiss'.

Of course God IS able to forgive, (offer mercy to), WHOMEVER He so chooses. That is not for us to judge for we don't even understand 'exactly' how He will. But it certainly stands to reason that those that deliberately 'go against' God have the more likelyhood of being judged negatively than those that don't. And The Word, as offered, pretty much offers this over and over again. Through The actual words of Christ and those of His apostles.

MEC

 

[Vic C.]

See guys, it wasn't the Jews or the Romans, It was The Father and the Son. The people that carried it out were the instruments in fulfilling God's will.

Hey MEC, does that sound familiar? :-D

Just to clue in some of the newcomers, my statement to MEC was in reference to a three or four page discussion we all had last year on "Who killed Jesus". 8-)

 

[Imagican]

And as can clearly be seen, we both continue with a 'different' understanding.

Judas was "the instrument' of Christ's betrayal. He was used by God to betray The Son. Some would offer that there was NO responsibility on the part of Judas for he had NO choice but to fulfill the will of God. Yet we have scripture PLAINLY placing responsibility on Judas for his betrayal.

Christ being 'sent' to fulfill God's will doesn't alter the reality of those that 'deny Him'. Although Christ came to 'free ALL men from death', all men will NOT choose to accept what has been offered. Judas obviously chose to ignore what was offered for the sake of 'filthy lucre'.

So too did MANY Jews, Romans, and even Pontius, who ordered the execution of Christ.

Let me ask this folks, when the time comes for mankind to 'accept the mark of the Beast; we have already been warned that to accept the 'mark' is to 'loose' that which has been offered. Mankind will be given a 'choice'. Those that choose mortal 'life' will LOOSE eternal life. It's a choice that will obviously be one of 'faith'. So this begs the question: WHO will be responsible for the actual 'decision'?

A man is given an order in war. The man recognizes that the order is WRONG. That it goes against that which the man KNOWS is 'right' according to The Word. Will he be held responsible for NOT standing up for what he KNOWS is right. Or will his going against The Word be forgiven simply because 'someone' TOLD him to do it?

I see NO difference here. I cannot imagine one having ANY 'good' in them NOT being able to plainly SEE the difference between 'right' and 'wrong'. To go against that which one KNOWS in their heart is 'wrong' is certainly to be 'judged' according to his heart. And I cannot imagine one that even has a heart being able to murder an innocent man simply because someone 'told' them to do it. One's heart would have to be rather 'dark' to begin with to do that which is obviously against 'all that is right'.

MEC

 

[MarkT]

This video explains about other religions that also had the same stories that Jesus had, many years before, . . . even 3000 years before, in the case of Horus. What do we do about these when it seems that the same information is given for these other gods, albeit, not precisely, but WAY too close to be coincidence, and occured before Christianity and the New Testiment?

You have to endure the first 1 minute and 55 seconds before the video actually gets into what I want this topic to be about.

First, I haven't done the research on this, so I have no idea if the information on this video IS actually correct, but if it is, I think it poses a huge problem.

Comments? I'd like to hear your take on this.

I don't know if we should be surprised by this information even if it is true. The Christian belief is that all men come from or are descendants of the survivors of the flood, therefore the knowledge of God would have been in every culture and that's what we find. The story of Genesis would have been known in every culture; that is, in particular, the knowledge of the light. The knowledge of the light was therefore before all men and every religion, even the Egyptian religion. The idea of associating the sun with the light isn't so strange if you remember that all men turned to worshipping idols. It's not as if the Egyptians didn't have any knowledge God; Pharoah let Moses and the Israelites go out of Egypt because he feared God. It's that they worshipped false gods, like the sun, for example, or golden calves. Clearly the Egyptians believed in many gods and they were astrologers; they looked to the heavens for signs. Again we see that they had some knowledge of heaven and earth, which is what we would expect to see if the Genesis story is correct; their knowledge of heaven must have come from the ones who settled the land after the flood.

 

[MarkT]

We have very little that has come down to us from the beginning from Genesis except for the knowledge of the light, and that all men would have some knowledge of the Holy One of Israel.

 

[turnorburn]

You can find all of the answers to your questions in the book tittled "The Two Babylons"
by Alexander Hislop. And use your bible to authenticate it, warning, reading this book is no walk in the park but it will satisfy your curiosity.. :wink:

http://www.biblebelievers.com/babylon/index.htm

 

[Orion]

It has been my experience that what ONE person claims, and even shows evidence for, another person will refute that evidence and show other evidence that turns the debate back around. I'm sure this book would be refuted by someone else. Too bad no one knows these questions for certain. :

 

[turnorburn]

You didn't read the whole book did you, that just tells me you don't have an interest in the
subject matter, do you think the author spent a few minutes getting his facts. Like I said, it will explain all of your questions.. :wink:

It has been my experience that what ONE person claims, and even shows evidence for, another person will refute that evidence and show other evidence that turns the debate back around. I'm sure this book would be refuted by someone else. Too bad no one knows these questions for certain. :