and the Madonna and Child motif came from depictions of Isis and the infant Horus.

Most of you probably know this already, but here's a really interesting BBC documentary on early Christian art:

The Dark Ages: An Age Of Light - Part One
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4o1dc41r28


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_comparative_mythology#Iconography



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/18/2019 03:20AM by anybody.

Jesus was everyone according to some people. The main contribution to Christian iconography was the solar halo, which the Buddhists also took from Greek invaders into NW India.

However even that isn't a big deal. Many people can see auras and halos. I see them flaming around peoples' heads even though I only believe in science.

Science is a belief system itself, for the most part. A branch of politics that was used to break the church’s monopoly on power. It was an improvement, as scientists aren’t intentionally burning people alive. Although from your direct experience you can see it still has a way to go.

So why does science ignore evidence that it doesn’t like?

BTW, have you heard from Drs. Pons and Fleischman lately?

How about Immanuel Velikovsky or Erich von Däniken?

Here's a famous case -- the "N-rays" that never really existed
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_ray

"The "discovery" excited international interest and many physicists worked to replicate the effects. However, the notable physicists Lord Kelvin, William Crookes, Otto Lummer, and Heinrich Rubens failed to do so. Following his own failure, self-described as "wasting a whole morning", the American physicist Robert W. Wood, who had a reputation as a popular "debunker" of nonsense during the period, was prevailed upon by the British journal Nature to travel to Blondlot's laboratory in France to investigate further. Wood suggested that Rubens should go since he had been the most embarrassed when Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany asked him to repeat the French experiments, and then after two weeks Rubens had to report his failure to do so. Rubens, however, felt it would look better if Wood went, since Blondlot had been most polite in answering his many questions.

In the darkened room during Blondlot's demonstration, Wood surreptitiously removed an essential prism from the experimental apparatus, yet the experimenters still said that they observed N rays. Wood also stealthily swapped a large file that was supposed to be giving off N rays with an inert piece of wood, yet the N rays were still "observed". His report on these investigations were published in Nature, and they suggested that the N rays were a purely subjective phenomenon, with the scientists involved having recorded data that matched their expectations. There is reason to believe that Blondlot in particular was misled by his laboratory assistant, who confirmed all observations. By 1905, no one outside of Nancy believed in N rays, but Blondlot himself is reported to have still been convinced of their existence in 1926. Martin Gardner, referencing Wood's biographer William Seabrook's account of the affair, attributed a subsequent decline in mental health and eventual death of Blondlot to the resulting scandal, but there is evidence that this is at least some exaggeration of the facts."



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/19/2019 10:01AM by anybody.

babyloncansuckit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So why does science ignore evidence that it
> doesn’t like?

It doesn't.

Visitors Welcome Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> babyloncansuckit Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So why does science ignore evidence that it
> > doesn’t like?
>
> It doesn't.

Best to rephrase this. Bad SCIENTISTS ignore evidence they don't like. It happens occasionally. Cosmetic companies rig trials all the time and if there a controversial political or cultural element which conflicts with the findings, then bad scientists will try and dodge that bullet.

Remember, science is an ideal. Ideals aren"t always maintained

If there’s hope for science, maybe there’s hope for religion.

Wiki isn't exactly the most credible source, and BBC "tabloid tendencies" are equally suspect.

With Osiris we find the story of The Resurrection, and the idea of a virgin conceiving appears in a number of ancient myths.

Finally, Horus was the "falcon god" and depicted as the bird or a man with a falcon head.

Have fun studying that stuff; it's pretty convoluted. I took a grad-level class in Egyptology about a dozen years ago. One "high point" I remember was the professor--a delightful Polish woman--starting to tell a story about the BOA papyrus and then stopping herself, saying "This is Utah; I better not."

LOL @ exmos who beleaf this atheistic propaganda ~


just LOL ~


in b 4 ~ OPie spends 1/10 the time reading the Holy Bible instead of posting links to this atheist non-sense ~

Z said:
I>n b 4 ~ OPie spends 1/10 the time reading the Holy Bible instead of posting links to this atheist non-sense ~


I can't tell if this is a joke, or if Ziller is informing us about how much he reads the Bible. Here are some thoughts in case he was serious about spending that much time reading the Bible.

Realize there are other books out there too, like science text books.

I have to wonder when people say they are reading the Bible over and over and over, why they need to. Are they slow readers or didn't study and comprehend it the first 50 times? Is it more of a search for hidden or missed meaning? Is it more of a mantra for them? Are they trying to memorize parts to recite like Muslims or Jews might?

Why not branch out beyond one book to study other things, many of which provide insight about their favorite book?

It's alarming how blinder-locked into the holy books people become, and they never repudiate or criticize the parts that have done irreparable damage. It takes a lot of work to cherry pick all the time.

I had a 70 year old friend in Alabama who would have to tell me every time we met that she goes to Bible School on Wednesdays. I think that may have been her code to say, "I'm a good person because I study the Bible." After all those decades, she is still trying to figure out the same various lessons from Bible stories and make them fit whatever shiny object she has in her life. Think of the opportunity lost by mostly reading the Bible and needing everything to align with it. She wouldn't know mitosis from meiosis or Hume from Spinoza. She doesn't understand most of the current scientific issues of our day. Branch out! The world has far more to offer beyond religious texts.

in b 4 ~


the more the exmo gets into the word of god ~


the more the word of god gets into the exmo ~


hope this helps dags ~


thx ~

Man, step away from the Kool-Aid.

Somebody once said of Wagner's operas: his music is better than it sounds.

I think Ziller is like that. His prose is better than it appears, which is perhaps the best gauge of irony. The only poster in the same ballpark when it comes to cryptic sagacity is Judic West, and his parents rarely let him out to play.

So we are probably stuck with the Z-man.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/18/2019 01:52PM by Lot's Wife.

I like his style. I can't tell when he is serious.

Heck, I can't even tell when I'm serious.

I can. You are serious, and correct, almost all the time.

As for Ziller, well. . .

“We are here to help the Vietnamese, because inside every gook there is an American trying to get out.”

RIP, Gunny.

Exactly my sentiments, dagny.

Reading the Bible over and over seems to be the same as saying you "learn something new every time you go to the temple." Hahaha.

And the ones who say that are intending to project the same message as your "Bible School on Wednesday's" friend: "I'm a good person because I do this, or that."

And as for cherry-picking. How could anyone in good conscience stand behind the whole thing?

Jesus existed. There is more contemporary evidence for the baptism and crucifixion of Jesus than for the assassination of Julius Caesar. And nobody disputes that Caesar was assassinated.

The fact that earlier religious concepts were grafted onto Jesus does nothing to undermine Jesus's existence.

No one knows what Jesus looked like and there is no recorded description of him.

This is about "creating" Jesus Christ out of pre-existing concepts, not (the human / avatar who may or may not have lived) Jesus of Nazareth.

The video shows how the early Christians went from using abstract symbols for their religion to depicting Christ as an androgynous youth like Apollo and finally as the kosmokrator bearded sky-god on a throne Zeus.


The only depiction of Jesus that would be accurate would be a blank picture frame -- because we have no information. All else is conjecture.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/19/2019 08:48AM by anybody.

False Messiahs were crucified at a rate of one per week around Jerusalem for most of that century, and they were more common around Passover, when it could be several in one day.

You know the story of Jesus being crucified together with two "criminals"?
Nah, in all likelihood, they were three Messiahs executed together.
And ours was not necessarily the one in the middle.

Barabbas is a curious one, it means "Son of the father". A bit strange for a criminal.

But I doubt they made up the bulk of those crucified.

Always look on the bright side of life.

I totally agree about the art. The earliest depiction of Jesus shows him as clean shaven, short haired and wearing a Greco Roman tunic. I haven't watched the video yet, but that sounds correct. Isis' depiction in art is similar to Mary. That is undeniable. If the video argued that Jesus didn't exist, even as an ordinary human being, and was just another sun god, I would strongly disagree with that though.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/19/2019 06:39PM by bona dea.

Joseph was not the first and will not be the last to plagiarize, borrow, steal, and adapt to make his own. That stuff has been going on forever. During Jesus time too? Why not. Certainly seems to have a lot in common, although not identical with stories previous to his time from what I have read. A good plagiarist always changes something up.

Like in writing, many experts claim that are only seven types of stories and seven types of plots. You can add all sorts of details and change the settings and the periods but, the story underneath is the same. So, Jesus based on Apollo or anybody else? Makes sense.

What I'm trying to figure out is which of the story types is the story of Jesus:

Overcoming the Monster.
Rags to Riches.
The Quest.
Voyage and Return.
Comedy.
Tragedy.
Rebirth.

I would say all of the above.

As for exMos I would say it is definitely "Overcoming the Monster."

Done & Done Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> What I'm trying to figure out is which of the
> story types is the story of Jesus:
>
> Overcoming the Monster.
> Rags to Riches.
> The Quest.
> Voyage and Return.
> Comedy.
> Tragedy.
> Rebirth.
>
> I would say all of the above.
>
> As for exMos I would say it is definitely
> "Overcoming the Monster."

A bit hard to pin the Jesus story down as "rags to riches" (more like riches to rags), or comedy.

The trouble is that you can apply all of these to real people! Look at Napoleon Bonaparte -

> Overcoming the Monster.

Napoleon established new laws and tried to overturn the old systems of Europe. He succeeded to a large extent but not in Britain.

> Rags to Riches.

Napoleon's family were undistinguished Corsicans, and he became the most powerful man in Europe.

> The Quest.

See above.

> Voyage and Return.

The journey to Moscow and back. See rebirth too.

> Comedy.

Yes - he ended up being made king of a small island.

> Tragedy.

Yes. He lost everything at least twice. Retreat from Moscow a huge tragedy.

> Rebirth.

Yes!!! Napoleon made the biggest comeback in history, and went from imprisonment to being able to take on the might of most of Europe at Waterloo (which he lost, but getting back to that stage is incredible)

He ended up living out the rest of his days on a tiny island in the remote Atlantic, an almost mythical island, surrounded by giant tortoises and wallpaper laced with arsenic - which some peopple claimed killed him and others that it is an urban legend.

So you're saying Jesus was actually based on Napoleon? :)