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

[Orion]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aW2N46vf4Q

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.

 

[Vic C.]

Yeah, I've heard all these false messiah stories; never actually saw any actual proof in the way of sacred writings. All the false gods and messiahs drifted away like dust in the wind.

I stopped watching the video when the narrator said Jesus was born on December 25th. That is a lie propagated by those who want to continue in "tradition" and/or debunk Christianity. We know (most do anyway) He wasn't born on the day or even that part of the year. Those who really search and understand the Scripture (especially Jewish Laws,calendars and customs)can almost pinpoint the season and aprox. day of His birth... and December isn't even close! 8-)

 

[Veritas]

I just did a wikipedia search on "Horus" and all I can say is that I don't really feel comfortable quoteing the story here (its very vulgar). I'll have to watch the video because from what I read on wiki I don't see any correlation whatsoever to Christ.

I also did a wikipedia search on "Mithra" and "Mithraism" and there seem to be slight similarities depending on which scholar you believe (but I would say there is no more similarity than that of any other major religion and Christianity). Mithra is also part of a multitude of divinities, and it looks like the stories of Mithra have changed quite a bit throughout the ages. I seems that alot of people have alot of different speculations about what Mithraists actually believed. It's interesting to note that one of the church fathers, Justin, apparently accused Mithraism of trying to imitate the Christians.

Guess I'll have to watch your video.

 

[unred typo]

Orion, think about all the prophesies of the coming messiah. Even the wise men from the far country had heard of them and traveled great distances to see the Christ. That shows that the prophesies were well known in other lands. Satan would know them as well. To make a counterfeit, he would have to duplicate the fulfillment of these, preferably before the real one came along.

The video also raised more questions than it answered. Did you ever hear of them before? Did they perform miracles? Were there witnesses to the resurrections? How do we know these ‘histories’ were not written after the fact? These were foretold as well: Jesus said there would be many false Christs that would arise, and to be aware of their increase. A claim that this one came first is hard to disprove from where we sit, but to be a good counterfeit, some may have even been brought into play by Satan himself before the real Christ. Just some things to consider. :smt102

 

[handy]

Sorry, I can't watch the video because this dinosaur of a computer, but I've heard the whole Mithras story before as well.

Veritas said, "Mithra is also part of a multitude of divinities, and it looks like the stories of Mithra have changed quite a bit throughout the ages. I seems that alot of people have alot of different speculations about what Mithraists actually believed. It's interesting to note that one of the church fathers, Justin, apparently accused Mithraism of trying to imitate the Christians."

Bingo! Part of the reason why Mithras is being touted as a reason to "debunk" Christianity, is because folks have actually applied Chrisitan practices and beliefs to Mithras, not the other way around. Prior to the rise of Christianity, there was very little in common between the two beliefs, except for the sacrificed god. And, the sacrificed god is not that uncommon of a theme in ancient traditions. Just because it was a common theme though, doesn't mean that we should throw out Christianity.

 

[Imagican]

Perhaps Satan, The FATHER of LIES, intorduced Mithraism in order to 'confuse' those that NEVER MET Christ Himself. So that WHEN those that already 'believed' in Mithra WERE introduced to Christianity, this confusion would allow them to 'create' a 'mingling' of the TWO. For we KNOW that MUCH of the Mithriatic traditions 'seem' to have been adopted into certain denominations of the Christian faith.

There is MUCH evidence that a 'trinity' existed in Mithraism. And there is NO evidence in the BIBLE that God offered the understanding of this through The Word. For the word 'trinity' itself DOES NOT EXIST in The Word. It CERTAINLY came from 'somewhere'. And HOW strange for God to wait HUNDREDS of years AFTER the death of His Son to reveal such a 'concept'.

The Jews know of NO 'trinity' yet they ARE God's CHOSEN PEOPLE. He has revealed Himself to these over and over again throughout the history of God's relationship with man yet NEVER made ANY indication to these that there was a 'heavenly trinity'. Curiouser and Curiouser.

So, perhaps, Satan with his desire to usurp the authority of God 'created' these religions that would 'closely', (in some respects), resemble 'the TRUTH' in order to offer CONFUSION to mankind in the hopes that this confusion may be able to 'blind' some to THE TRUTH when passed down from generation to generation.

MEC

 

[cyberjosh]

There was a thread posted on this topic in the Apologetic forums a month or so ago here. Look at my responses there, in which I debunked this foolish, deceptive idea. It also has a link to the YouTube video (it may not be the same video you reference here, but its the same topic nonetheless).

God Bless and fight for the truth,

~Joshua

 

[Imagican]

cyber and others,

Please don't confuse my offering as ACCEPTANCE of the idea that Christianity CAME from 'previous pagan religions'. For I am NOT a believer in such 'non-sense'. I simply attempted to point out a POSSIBLE 'reason' for their existence to 'begin with'. For there MUST be a 'reason' that such controversy exists. These are NOT random events that have taken place throughout history but 'created' by 'design'.

Kind of like finding 'footprints of humans' alongside the fossils of dinosaurs. some would call it 'random' chance. But these circumstances were OBVIOUSLY 'designed' to attempt to 'push' mankind in certain 'directions' of 'thinking'.

It's amazing how even MANY that 'claim' Christ as their Savior IGNORE the information given to us concerning Satan and the power that he possesses to influence mankind. Many indicate through their understanding that they MUST believe that he is some kind of benevolent entity that is just 'sitting back' WAITING for the END. Far be this from the TRUTH. For MOST of the WORLD is under HIS influence. Regardless of the method or WAY in which he is ABLE to perform such a momumental task, that does NOT alter the FACT that it is 'taking place' right before our very eyes.

MEC

 

[Devekut]

What, for a start, I would like to see sourced from this video is the following:

1. Where in ancient writings is the sun titled "God's Sun" in a monotheistic sense of the meaning? Obviously the sun was personified as a divinity, but the way he phrases it "God's Sun" seems possibly misleading...

2. I would like to see a source that titles the Sun as "Savior of the world". Obviously the ancients connected it with life and saw its life-giving properties, but in what sense was it ever called a "savior" ?

3. I would like to see sources that the emytological origin of the words "sunset" and "sunrise" are dervied from Egyptian.

 

[Orion]

Devekut, most of what you bring up are things that I saw as "bad information" on that video. I found that whole segment to be rather ignorant, actually.

However, I have heard of the similarities in Horus mythology, and know it predates the Old Testiment, so if the prophecies hadn't been given yet, then Satan would not have known about it. I highly doubt that God would let Satan in on those truths. Why would He? So, MAYBE Mithra and the other "post prophesy" mythologies could have been influenced somehow, but not Horus.

This isn't the only time I've heard of stories that predate the OT that show up IN the OT. Ancient Sumerian texts come to mind.

 

[Veritas]

Orion, have you done any additional research on Horus?

This is from: http://touregypt.net/godsofegypt/horus.htm

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.

The parallels presented in the video are very unconvincing after doing a bit of research.

- Like vic stated ... December 25th is not the day Jesus was born

- As far as I can tell Horus was not born of a virgin... but there was a miracle of sorts to produce Horus. His father was Osiris and his mother was Isis. Seth killed Osiris and chopped him up into 13 pieces. Isis finds all but 1 piece and puts the body back together. (I won't go into further details about what that 1 piece was but it's kind of crucial for little Horus to be possible) anyways she magically makes one for Osiris and then Horus is concieved right before Osiris goes down to the underworld.

- After looking at lots of Horus stories myself, I can find no story about a star

- I can't find any stories about 3 wisemen or deities at the birth of Horus. Plus, there are not even 3 wise men specified by the Bible.

- I can't find any stories about Horus being a teacher at age 12. Rather, I've seen descriptions of Horus as a weakling child and/or stunted from the waist down.

- I can't find any stories about Horus being baptized or anything about a "baptizer" known as Anup.

- I can't find anything about 12 disciples of Horus. I did read that Horus had four semi-gods that were followers, and I've read speculation about 16 human followers.

- I found stories about Horus doing "miraculous" things (he was considered a god)... but not things like Jesus. I read nothing about Horus walking on water. Perhaps the video got Horus mixed up with Oannes a fishman who came out of the sea during the day, and went back into the sea at night.

- The stories of Horus depict him as a sky god or sun god so yes he might be refered to as "the light" but that's for a different reason than Jesus is. I read nothing about him being "the lamb of god" or "good shepard" or even "the truth"

- I can't find any stories about Horus and a crucifixion and resurrection. I did find a story about Horus being torn to pieces and Iris requesting the crocodile god to rescue him from the water.

I'm pretty sure the theories presented by the video were started by a guy named Gerald Massey who was an English poet of the 1800s. He considered himself a druid and was interested in Eygpt. I get the feeling that most people with credentials do not share the same theories he does.

 

[Texasgirl]

Regarding the question of the thread, one thing to 'do' about these things would perhaps be for those who insist on labeling the Catholic church as having 'pagan' roots to consider the consequences. It only serves to reinforce the view that Christianity is a 'copy' of these pagan stories, and leads many (especially the young) to see Jesus as being nothing more than a made-up figure based on previous mythology. You can't label the largest branch of Christianity as being 'pagan' and not expect it to be believed by those who will therefore conclude that what the pagans say about Christ being copied from prior pagan beliefs is correct.

Just a thought that I'm sure will be lost on some, but I would suggest speaking sometime to a young person who has become involved in Wicca, and how this is used in their rejection of Christ.

 

[handy]

Such a good point, Texasgirl!

 

[Imagican]

I, PERSONALLY, have met a number of persons that claim to BE CATHOLIC AND WICCAN. When I was 'younger' I met a NUMBER of 'topless dancers', EACH of whom CLAIMED to BE Catholic. The MAFIA were CLASSIC ITALIANS AND CATHOLICS.

And ALL of these had absolutely NO influence by ME to BE what they claimed to BE.

My views as to the 'pagan' ROOTS of the Catholic church could do NOTHING to dispell The Spirit. For IF The Spirit is IN one, then NO amount of information that I could offer would be ABLE to dissuade one from THE TRUTH.

However, a 'skittish' belief system could CERTAINLY be undermined BY THE TRUTH.

For He came NOT to 'bring PEACE' to this Earth, but to make enemies out of one's OWN HOUSEHOLD.

So PLEASE realize that "I", for one, AM aware of the dangers, NOT of pointing out the TRUTH, but of accepting UNTRUTH, as BEING the MOST DANGEROUS.

I take it that YOU are under the assumption that the Catholic church IS the FIRST 'Christian' church. HOW WRONG this idea TRULY IS. They were the FIRST to ORGANIZE a 'religion' that they CALLED 'Christianity' but were by NO MEANS the FIRST Church of Christ. This organization didn't EVEN EXIST until hundreds of years AFTER the death of Christ.

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

MEC

 

[cyberjosh]

Imagician,

Thank you for your input, but please don't take us off topic. We have a Catholic thread for such discussions. The idea was to "not defame the name of Christianity" (this includes the Catholic Church). If the Catholic Church's deeds are evil, the outside will know well enough, "You shall know them by their fruits", but surely damage will come to both sides if the attacks are internal to the faith, for "A house divided against itself cannot stand". The Bible advocates Church correction & discipline, but calling the Catholic Church pagan is indeed a bit extreme. That, I believe, was the point Texasgirl was making. It would be nice if we could get back on topic and discuss the OP please.

~Josh

 

[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]

Such a good point, Texasgirl!

Thank you very much.

 

[Arj]

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

 

[Texasgirl]

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

It's been a while since I researched all of this Arj, but I spent quite a bit of time on it at one point.

When you really start to look at the 'similarities', you find they are not as compelling as generally presented by those who wish to make the point that Jesus is a 'copy'. When you read the actual mythology, you will find that any one figure actually has dozens of inconsistent stories associated with them, very little of which reflects any commonality with Jesus. If you take a little piece from one story, and another little piece from a different story of a completely different time and culture, you can build something that seems similar.

Also, you will find that the 'commonalities' that are represented are actually not that common either if you research. For example, there is one of the figures (I can't remember exactly which one now) that is supposed to have 'resurrected'. If you actually read the mythology, you will discover that his 'resuurection' is 'God' bringing him back to life as a tree. Not exactly the same thing you see, yet those who want to make the comparison say "here's this resurrection story that pre-dates your Jesus".

Another point -- one of the figures is supposed to originate from a 'virgin birth' that pre-dates Jesus by several hundred years. However, remember that the prophecy of a virgin birth in Isaiah pre-dates that virgin birth story by several hundred years as well, so who is actually copying from what?

So I think if you actually want to spend the time researching, you will find that these stories are not all they are presented to be by those who claim the comparison.

The most generous and interesting point I've ever come across regarding this topic is this one. While we understand the most complete and accurate revelation of God prior to Jesus is through the covenant with Abraham, that does not mean there was no revelation in other cultures. What they saw in the 'shadows' of their mythology could in fact have been a preparation to receive the Gospel. Considering that many of them did just that, while the Gospel was rejected by mainline Judaiism gives that idea some weight I think.

 

[Imagican]

I 'thought' that I WAS on topic, but pardon me if you misunderstood. Let me clarify:

Where do YOU suppose that MOST of the 'pagan tradition' held onto in the churches TODAY CAME FROM? Any idea?

MOST denominations today hold a 'belief system STEEPED in pagan tradition brought about by a 'mingling' of religions. Mithraism CERTAINLY had an influence on the first ROMAN Christians of 'means'. For this WAS the religion of the LEADERS of Rome.

Just as the Carribean inhabitants have mingled Christianity with their PREVIOUS religions, so too would ANY 'group' of people that exist. Just as Paul warned the Corrinthians of their "RETURNING" to their "pagan roots", so too have MOST denominations simply 'mingled' their previous religions WITH Christianity. How do you SUPPOSE that there is BUT ONE denomination. Where do you SUPPOSE that the OPPOSING views CAME FROM?

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.

I was simply trying to 'point out' that the OP is MUCH DEEPER than the author realized, (most likely), and that MUCH of the pagentry of the Christian 'religion' today is just THAT: pagentry with 'pagan' roots. Christianity did NOT 'come from' these previous pagan religions but WAS infiltrated BY THEM. The PROOF is all around us and it's plainly visable to ANY that 'are able to SEE'.


MEC