• In total there are 2 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 2 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
    Most users ever online was 709 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 1:09 am

The Mythicist Position

Engage in conversations about worldwide religions, cults, philosophy, atheism, freethought, critical thinking, and skepticism in this forum.
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.

All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
User avatar
tat tvam asi
Reading Addict
Posts: 1367
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:57 pm
14
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 571 times
Been thanked: 549 times

Re: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

Here's a link to the documented sources for ZG the movie:

http://thezeitgeistmovement.com/wiki/in ... _Ever_Told

It's as if KD8 and others never even bothered to read through them before setting out to make all of these assertions and in turn leading others astray who assume that people like KD8 know what they're talking about, when it's quite apparent that they really don't. It's just a bunch of knee jerk reaction attempts to try and quickly shore up the faith, just as the administrator has pointed out in his abrupt counter reaction to KD8.
User avatar
Robert Tulip

2B - MOD & SILVER
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6497
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:16 pm
18
Location: Canberra
Has thanked: 2717 times
Been thanked: 2659 times
Contact:
Australia

Re: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

The Zeitgeist source document is valuable to see the text of the movie narration against sources for each claim. It shows how a range of sources explain how the ancients measured time against the stars as a basis of religion. The explanation of the Great Year is useful to explain how mythicism supports a cosmology of long term change. The argument is compelling that central ideas in world mythology are based on astronomy against the framework of the Great Year.

The strong parallels of Jesus and Horus are emphasised in this text from Zeitgeist, which reads as a magnificent manifesto for mythicism. The connection of typology between Jesus and Horus is clear, with both Jesus and Horus doing battle for good against evil, which is personified as the similar foes of Satan in Christianity and Seth in Egyptian myth. Jesus is a type of Horus figure and Satan is a type of Seth figure. The connections to the sun, and the infancy and holy family stories, show that Jesus and Horus held the same respective broad archetypal positions in the religions of Christianity and Ancient Egypt. So, to understand Christ, we really have to know about Horus, to see the gospels against their antecedents in previous religion. The argument that Christianity borrowed from Egypt is obvious.
User avatar
tat tvam asi
Reading Addict
Posts: 1367
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:57 pm
14
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 571 times
Been thanked: 549 times

Re: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

Yes, I think that it is Robert. As Stahrwe reflected earlier, most of the apologists first reaction is to go straight to accusing people of just making these parallels up, as if they don't exist. That's an old accusation that has long since been refuted. And the next wave was for apologists to claim that the parallels are there after all, but that the pagans copied the Christians during the common era and these parallels weren't ancient - as if the pagan paralles don't date to any earlier than 150 CE. That too has long since been refuted with the evidence available from the ancient world and the funny thing is that the argument of Justin Martyr - that the devil had come in advance of Christ in order to mimic his characteristics in the pagan world - goes to show that early apologists couldn't claim that the pagans had copied Christianity because everyone at that time knew good and well which of the two was older. If they could have made that sort of a claim they dam well would have, but they couldn't. It was much too obvious that the pagan religions had made use of many of these motifs previously, for centuries as it were. The only way to address the parallels between Christianity and paganism was for the early Christian apologists to claim that the devil got there first, which means the pagan religions were the first to use these motifs. And the primary source evidence in Egypt shows just that.
User avatar
stahrwe

1I - PLATINUM CONTIBUTOR
pets endangered by possible book avalanche
Posts: 4898
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:26 am
14
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 166 times
Been thanked: 315 times

Re: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

Robert Tulip wrote:
stahrwe wrote:
How in the name of In Ho Tep is YEC unethical?
I think you meant Imhotep.

Knowledge is based on evidence. Science observes the universe to form a coherent explanation of the nature of reality. If we want to act with a good conscience, and to behave in ways that have good consequences, we should try to base our actions and values on sound evidence.
Define 'good' as in 'good conscience', 'good consequences'.
Robert Tulip wrote: Stahrwe said: I have sound evidence that my neighbor hates me dispite my numerous attempts to reconcile with him, should I destroy him?

Hi Stahrwe, I will go through your responses one by one. You are pointing out here that facts are not sufficient to set values, which need a spiritual origin. My view is that we can use evidence to guide our ethics, especially by study of the consequences of different courses of action in historical precedent. In your example, to ‘destroy’ a neighbour is likely to produce poisonous consequences for you, with simmering hatred from your neighbour’s friends making it hard for you to live with trust and freedom. Jesus taught spiritual values including love, forgiveness, mercy, justice and truth as guiding principles. These seem to me a sound basis to establish secure relations at personal and global levels.
It worked well for the Romans. It is widely understood that the Roman empire fell due to internal decay which weakened them. They were finally defeated by a fierce rabble rather than an organized army. Based on the EVIDENCE of history a successful civilization should behave as the Romans did, right?
robert tulip wrote: stahrwe said: "Coherent explanation of the nature of reality, really? Are you familiar with Q.E.D.?"

Hi Stahrwe: Yes. Science provides an accurate explanation for the history of the world. Literal religion provides inaccurate explanations for history. Therefore we should use science in the effort to be accurate in our views. Quad erat demonstrandum, problem solved.
Q.E.D. I was referring to Quantum Electro Dynamics, a branch of sciece which is decidedly weird.
robert tulip wrote:Young Earth Creationism, the myth that the universe was created by God in 4004 BC, is untrue. Actions and values based on this myth are lacking in a coherent evidentiary basis.

Stahrwe said: Sometimes, the best course of action is to act contrary to the evidentiary basis. I had an evidentiary basis that the object of my affection did not want anything to do with me but I pursued her anyway and won her heart.

Hi Stahrwe: You put your finger here on why many people don’t accept science as a basis for decisions. As Shakespeare said in Hamlet, there is more in heaven and earth than is dreamt of in your philosophy. People seek an encompassing vision of human meaning and purpose, and often find this in the Bible, not in science. As well, the great geniuses of history have been contrarians, going against the prevailing consensus of their day. Hence the attraction of worldviews that are contrarian, such as creationism. The trouble here is that creationism is wrong.
I'm not sure you make any valid point here other to get in a lick that YEC is wrong.
robert Tulip wrote:stahrwe said: There are many YEC's who are concern about climate change. That charge is bogus."

Hi Stahrwe: We will only agree on response to climate change when enough of the world agrees to base opinions on evidence. YEC is a massive force pulling in the opposite direction.
stahrwe said: Possibly, as I said, I know of many believers who are concerned about climate change. Personally, I think it is lot of bunk and fabricated science.
Robert Tulip wrote: stahrwe said: YEC has nothing to do with the rapture, again there are many YEC's who subscribe to the rapture and many who do not."

Hi Stahrwe My impression is that YEC and rapture thinking go together like a horse and carriage. Both come from the same false supernatural myth of a personal creator God. Rapture theory conflicts with John 3:17 ‘I came to save the world, not to condemn it’.
Of course it does not conflict! Jesus came to save the world not to judge it. God will judge the world. I have a dear friend who is as much of a YEC as I am and she is totally opposed to my view of the rapture. On this subject your prejudices are wrong.
robert tulip wrote: stahrwe said: YEC is not opposed to rational dialogue about any of the problems you cite. Can you provide examples of mainstream YEC's who have advocated against rational dialogue on any of the topics you list?

Hi Stahrwe: Sorry Stahrwe, I just can’t get over the stumbling block that YEC is wrong, so its adherents have this 800 pound pet gorilla at their elbow, which everyone else can see but they seem to think doesn’t matter. Your phrase ‘mainstream YECs’ is a contradiction. YEC is outside the mainstream of rational opinion.
That is certainly an epic copout. You made a statement about positions which YEC believers take about dialogue on specific subjects. You brought it up. I am just asking that you support your statement. As you are unable to do so I must conclude that your statement was bogus to begin with.

robert tulip wrote: stahrwe said: Certainly poverty is something which has been a concern of the church since Jesus.

Hi Stahrwe: Many YECs are loving and charitable, but to find effective Christian response to poverty it is better to look to Calvin and capitalism than to Saint Francis and compassion.
I believe that your purported ties to rationalism are coming loose based on the above statement. I would be interested in your explanation of Calvinism as an effective response to poverty as one of the tenants of Calviism is predestination one might argue that aid to the poor is futile. History is full of christian organizations founded for the relief of the poor.

Just curious, without looking it up or googling it, do you know what YMCA stands for? Perhaps you have never hear of it down under.
robert tulip wrote: stahrwe said: The Jews are in Palestine based on a UN mandate and therefore, according to world law they are there legally. The territory they currently hold is larger than originally mandated because the surround countries went to war with them and Israel defeated them thus expanding. .

Hi Stahrwe: I support the right of Israel to national security, but my impression is that the mad apocalyptic ideas of fundamentalist Christians and Jews are distinctly unhelpful, instead adding to the volcano of hatred for Israel in the muslim world.
It wasn't the mad apocalyptic fundamentalist Christians or Jews which attacked Israel what 4 times? Once again, I challenge you to read: "Our Jerusalem" by Bertha Spaffor Vester for an account of the lives of the Palestinians before the Jews returned.

robert tulip wrote:stahrwe said: So far all I have seen in mythicism is wild fantasy and speculation contradicted by facts.

The core of mythicism is the observation that Biblical claims are extremely dubious and lack evidence. This applies to Jesus, Moses and Abraham. So, there is a negative story which says the Bible stories are false. This is not contradicted by facts. As to the speculative side of mythicism, providing an explanation for faith through comparative mythology, this is more speculative and embryonic. I think you have to understand the mythicist critique of orthodoxy before you can engage with it on its analysis of comparative mythology.
I am reminded of the scene in the Exorcist where father Damien is trying to explain to the old priest how many 'entities' are in the girl. The old priest stops him and says there is only one.
robert tulip wrote: stahrwe said: Jesus did not say that it was ethical to challenge authority, nor did he challenge the 'conventional' religion of his day. The religious leaders he confronted were corrupt to the core. As for challenging government, do you guys read the Bible or just make it up as you go along? Go read Rom. 13:1-7; and see if you want to amend your statement.

Stahrwe: There is a tension between the teachings of Jesus and Paul. The entire passion story of Christ is a challenge to authority.
More nonsense. The ultimate authority in the story is God the Father. Jesus faced that authority, He was tempted to challenge it and disobey but ultimately He was obedient. You totally miss the point because you are listening to the sound of old birds scratching their beaks on rocks instead of the true message.
n=Infinity
Sum n = -1/12
n=1

where n are natural numbers.
User avatar
stahrwe

1I - PLATINUM CONTIBUTOR
pets endangered by possible book avalanche
Posts: 4898
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:26 am
14
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 166 times
Been thanked: 315 times

Re: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

Star Burst wrote:stahrwe wrote:
. I am still trying to decide if is worth pursuing any Massey works.
Don't waste your time. Massey was an English Poet and only an amateur Egyptologist I would hardly count his work as a primary source and it would mean no more than you or I writing it...in other words he was an average everyday Joe with an opinion like everyone else.
I don't know about a waste of time; I discovered that the astrotheological discussion which I see presented by RT seems to originate, at least in part, with Massey.
Star Burst wrote:stahrwe wrote:
I am missing the joke, 'Egyptians borrowing from Paulinity'; what is Paulinity? something else Murdock made up?
Thats a reference to Christianity since he is credited with starting this whole mess to begin with. No Murdock did not make it up I did.
Did a presentation yesterday on the sermon where John Newton presented his composition, Amazing Grace. Newton was a slave trader and avowed atheist. He made it his duty to each day come up with the foulest blasphemies he could imagine. He was so successful at this that several times, his fellow shipmates complained and the captain had to speak to him about it. The story of the journey he made from profane atheist slave ship captain to Anglican minister and political force promoting the successful abolition of slavery in England
is fascinating.
n=Infinity
Sum n = -1/12
n=1

where n are natural numbers.
User avatar
stahrwe

1I - PLATINUM CONTIBUTOR
pets endangered by possible book avalanche
Posts: 4898
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:26 am
14
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 166 times
Been thanked: 315 times

Re: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

tat tvam asi wrote:Isn't it odd that Stahrwe wants to cling to mainstream sources when it comes to the historicity of Jesus but then strongly opposes mainstream sources when it comes to YEC. How very convenient. So which is it? Do we stick to mainstream sources or not Stahrwe? Because if we do then we come up with a situation where evolution is true, YEC is wrong, but there was an historical man named Jesus living in the first century. That's what we get if we are to cut down the middle and stick to accepted mainstream and majority thinking. It doesn't bode well for you're case at all. All of this appealing to authority hurts your arguments more than it helps you and you don't seem to realize that yet. It just gives an Evemerist view of Jesus, not a believers view because mainstream sources don't accept the super naturalism of the storyline as hard fact across the board. Just the few fringe scholars who believe all of these super natural events really happened because their faith demands such a belief despite the lack of any hard evidence to support it.
I am not opposed to any sources mainstream or obscure provided that they are well argued and documented. My request for mainstream examples of YEC supporters advocating for pollution was merely to leave off the outer fringe that exist in any large group. I suspect that there are supporters of astrotheology who claim to have been abducted by aliens but I would not promote them as examples of mainstream astrotheologists. My challenge was to find people like Jarvis or Falwell who say that pollution is ok. In this case you are doing precisely what I object to about Murdock and why I dismiss her. She twists information and distorts quotes.
tat tvam asi wrote:So I can gather from your last post that you haven't actually read CiE and you're upset that you can't make a case against Murdock based solely on her first book written about a decade ago before there was such a high demand for more and more scholarship to back up these claims. CiE isn't here second book by the way, that also gave you away as well. But in any case, CiE was designed to meet the demands of people making the very same accusations that you are making here who had the very same reaction to the CC. The bottom line is that the scholarship necessary to know more about the Horus-Jesus connection than what you get in some of these basic online encyclopedia articles is all there and the book is designed for the layman or scholar alike. It's meant to be analyzed in depth and it's meant to stick to well respected sources in large part. There's nothing wrong with encyclopedias Stahrwe, that's not the point. The point is that you don't get anything other than a generalized overview which is just that, but in this case there's much information lacking in the general overview entries that you've quickly read through in a haste to try and refute some one who's suggesting that Jesus may not have ever existed historically at all. It was a knee jerk reaction on your part and the lesson here is that you may want to second guess yourself in the future before depending on basic info to support an argument that extends to very in depth and scholarly oriented realms of discussion.
I have probably read more of CiE than you have of Massey, Taylor or Budge. I will leave it at this as response. I have been diverted the last week with another project which is over now. It is my intention to fully examine Murdock's claims. If there is academic support for them fine, if not I will report that. I have already spent a fair amount of time with her material as I have with Robert Taylor, Gerald Massey, and the mythology book I recommended to you by Budge. Of late I have been wondering if it is worth the effort since the mythicist position is so marginalized and seems to be collapsing under its own problems.

tat tvam asi wrote:There's a chapter in the beginning of CiE which outlines the details of Massey's peer reviewed status in his own day. Here's a link to an excert from the book that Murdock put up on her site: http://www.stellarhousepublishing.com/w ... assey.html
I copied and pasted the link directly to my internet and got an error, "Page not Found" response, pretty much what I expected.
tat tvam asi wrote:]It is evident from these remarks that a significant portion of Massey's work was "peer reviewed" by the eminent Dr. Samuel Birch, a remarkable development that should be factored into the assessment of Massey’s work. With such developments, it becomes evident that it is not the quality of Massey’s work at issue, since it is obviously sound, but that his conclusions as to the nonhistoricity and unoriginality of the Christian religion do not sit well with his detractors. This latter fact is critically important to bear in mind when studying Massey's works, especially since he largely discovered and developed parallels between the Egyptian and Christian religions, crucial data that may have otherwise been left to lie fallow based on occupational considerations by the vested-interested professionals upon whose work Massey relied.


Again, I got an error message when I tried the link You posted. Additionally, peer review usually requires more than one person. Dr. Samuel Birch seems to be a rather obscure scholar. Wikipedia only references one book under the category Publications in the article on him (no wonder you hate my use of encyclopedias). 1858 History of Ancient Pottery: Egyptian, Assyrian, and Greek. Two volumes. John Murray, London.
tat tvam asi wrote:You didn't know anything about his sources or peer reviewed status either judging by the content of your posts. Go ahead and read up on it though. It's all out in the open now that you haven't actually already read any of this yet, so go ahead and get caught up on the material so that you're not pushing any further intellectual dishonesty in the discussion.

Oh, and by the way, Budge is quoted heavily throughout the entire book and his opinion is very clear and straight forward that the Egyptian religion was an ancient version of what we get in Christianity. That's why he said that a comparison between the two religion would fill a comparatively large volume. But he wasn't threatened by these parallels the way that you are. He thought that God had revealed certain mysteries to the Egyptians that would later be fulfilled in Christianity, sort of like making straight the way of the Lord in advance to the arrival of Christ. And that's why Budge was so very open and honest about the parallels even though he was a devout Christian himself. He wasn't threatened by them in his own mind in the way that you and your Christian apologetic peers are so threatened by them now.
As previously demonstrated the fact that Murdock includes a quote is meaningless due to the way she parses them. I already have observed some distortions in your quotes of Budge. Which brings up the question; How much of his work have you read?
n=Infinity
Sum n = -1/12
n=1

where n are natural numbers.
User avatar
tat tvam asi
Reading Addict
Posts: 1367
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:57 pm
14
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 571 times
Been thanked: 549 times

Re: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

I just clicked on the active link and went right to it. Perhaps the problem you've been having all along is that you're not simply clicking on the active links. So here's the entire article since you can't manage to do something as basic as to click on the link I've provided:
In exploring the various Egyptian influences upon the Christian religion, one name frequently encountered is that of lay Egyptologist Gerald Massey (1828-1907). Born in abject poverty in England, Gerald Massey was almost entirely self-taught; yet, he was able to write and lecture about several subjects with tremendous erudition and authority. Despite his lack of formal education, Massey could read several languages, including not only English but also French, Latin, Greek and evidently Hebrew and Egyptian to a certain degree.

Massey was fortunate enough to live during an exciting time when Egyptology was in its heyday, with the discovery in 1799 of the Rosetta Stone and the subsequent decipherment of hieroglyphs in 1822 by Champollion. This monumental development allowed for the exposure to light of the fascinating Egyptian culture and religion, meaning that before that time no one could adequately read the Egyptian texts, which Massey ended up spending a considerable portion of his life studying and interpreting, and relatively little was known about the religion, for which Massey possessed a keen sense of comprehension.

In his detailed and careful analysis of the Egyptian religion, the pioneer Massey extensively utilized the Egyptian Book of the Dead--which was termed "The Ritual" by Champollion, a convention followed by Massey and others but since abandoned--as well as several other ancient Egyptian sources, including the Pyramid Texts and assorted other funeral texts and stele. Massey quite evidently understood the Egyptian spirituality and was able to present it in a highly sound and scientific manner.

In these intensive and meticulous efforts, Massey studied the work of the best minds of the time--all towering figures within Egyptology, especially during Massey’s era, when most of them were alive and some were familiar with his work. These celebrated authorities in Egyptology whose works Massey studied and utilized included: Sir Dr. Budge; Dr. Brugsch-Bey; Jean-François Champollion; Dr. Eugene Lefébure; Dr. Karl Richard Lepsius; Sir Dr. Gaston Maspero; Dr. Henri Edouard Naville; Sir Dr. William Flinders Petrie; Dr. Thomas Joseph Pettigrew; Sir Renouf; le vicomte de Rougé; Dr. Samuel Sharpe; and Sir Dr. John Gardner Wilkinson, among many other scholars in a wide variety of fields. As other examples, Massey also used the work of Sir Dr. J. Norman Lockyer, the physicist and royal English astronomer who was friends with Budge and knew Egypt well, along with that of Dr. Charles Piazzi Smyth, royal Scottish astronomer and professor of Astronomy at the University of Edinburgh. Massey further studied the work of Reverend Dr. Archibald Sayce, professor of Comparative Philology at Oxford, as well as that of famous mythologist Sir Dr. James George Frazer, although he did not agree with their conclusions. He likewise cited the work of Francois Lenormant, professor of Archaeology at the National Library of France, as well as that of comparative theologian and Oxford professor Dr. Max Müller, philosopher and Jesus biographer Dr. Ernest Renan, and Christian monuments expert Rev. Dr. John Patterson Lundy.

Gerald Massey was very influenced by the work of Dr. Samuel Birch (1813-1885), archaeologist, Egyptologist and Keeper of the Department of Oriental Antiquities in the British Museum. The creator of the first alphabetically arranged Egyptian dictionary, Dr. Birch also was the founder of the prestigious and influential Society of Biblical Archaeology, to which belonged many other notables in the fields of archaeology, Assyriology, Egyptology and so on. Much of this eye-opening work on comparative religion, in fact, emanated from this august body of erudite and credentialed individuals. Birch held many other titles and honors, including from Cambridge and Oxford Universities. His numerous influential works on Egypt, including the first English translation of the Book of the Dead, were cited for decades in scholarly publications.

In the "Introduction" to his book The Natural Genesis, Gerald Massey writes:

The German Egyptologist, Herr Pietschmann…reviewed the "Book of the Beginnings"... The writer has taken the precaution all through of getting his fundamental facts in Egyptology verified by one of the foremost of living authorities, Dr. Samuel Birch, to whom he returns his heartiest acknowledgements. (Massey, NG, viii)

Dr. Richard Pietschmann was a professor of Egyptology at the University of Göttingen, an impressive "peer reviewer" for one of Massey's early works on Egypt. By verifying his "fundamental facts" with Birch, Massey appears to be saying that his work was also reviewed by Birch, with whom he enjoyed a personal relationship expressed in his letters. Indeed, following this statement in The Natural Genesis, in his "Retort" to various attacks he endured, Massey remarked:

As I also say in my preface [to The Natural Genesis] I took the precaution of consulting Dr. Samuel Birch for many years after he had offered, in his own words, to "keep me straight" as to my facts, obtainable from Egyptian records. He answered my questions, gave me his advice, discussed variant renderings, read whatever proofs I sent him, and corrected me where he saw I was wrong. (Massey, Gerald Massey's Lectures, 251)

It is evident from these remarks that a significant portion of Massey's work was "peer reviewed" by the eminent Dr. Samuel Birch, a remarkable development that should be factored into the assessment of Massey’s work. With such developments, it becomes evident that it is not the quality of Massey’s work at issue, since it is obviously sound, but that his conclusions as to the nonhistoricity and unoriginality of the Christian religion do not sit well with his detractors. This latter fact is critically important to bear in mind when studying Massey's works, especially since he largely discovered and developed parallels between the Egyptian and Christian religions, crucial data that may have otherwise been left to lie fallow based on occupational considerations by the vested-interested professionals upon whose work Massey relied.

Massey was likewise personally friendly with Sir Lockyer (1836-1920), as well as Dr. Birch's protégé Assyriologist Dr. Theophilus Goldridge Pinches (1856-1934). Naturally, among these various scholars of his era, Massey also had his critics, including, apparently, the devout Roman Catholic Renouf, who evidently was a mysterious anonymous Egyptologist who spewed calumny and vitriol at Massey, essentially calling him a lunatic. That Massey was so well known as to draw such attention and ire speaks to his efficacy, rather than his incompetence. As he himself said in his retort to such vituperation, "Such damnation is dirt cheap! Also, the time has passed for denunciation to be mistaken for disproof." (Massey, GML, 250) In his "Retort," Massey also made the following observation, which readers of this present work might wish to keep in mind as well: "I had already warned my readers that they must expect little help from those Egyptologists and Assyriologists who are bibliolaters first and scholars afterwards. Bibliolatry puts out the eye of scholarship or causes confirmed strabismus," the latter term referring to a vision disorder. "Bibliolatry," of course, refers to "Bible worship," while "bibliolaters" are "Bible worshippers."

In his scholarly works on Egypt, in addition to the available Egyptian sources, Gerald Massey utilized numerous other ancient texts, including Judeo-Christian writings such as the Bible, as well as those of early Church fathers such as Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Eusebius, Epiphanius and Jerome. Massey also cited non-Christian, Jewish and Gnostic writers such as Herodotus, Philo, Pausanias and Valentinus, along with writings such as the Talmud and the Hindu Puranas. Having taught himself to read not only English but also several other languages including Egyptian hieroglyphs as well as Sanskrit, providing an extensive comparison between these two languages, Massey scrutinized and interpreted the texts and monuments for himself, such as the Book of the Dead, as well as the famous zodiacs in the Temple of Dendera and the "Nativity Scene" at the Temple of Luxor, texts and images that predated the "Christian era" by centuries to millennia. Regarding his abilities with the hieroglyphs, Massey states:

…although I am able to read the hieroglyphics, nothing offered to you is based on my translation. I work too warily for that! The transcription and literal renderings of the hieroglyphic texts herein employed are by scholars of indisputable authority. There is no loophole of escape that way. (Massey, GML, 1)

Thus, while Massey did read hieroglyphs and therefore worked with primary sources, knowing the contentiousness of the subject, he purposely did not rely on his own translations and interpretations but consulted repeatedly with "scholars of indisputable authority," in other words, those previously mentioned, including Dr. Samuel Birch, with whom Massey conferred personally on much of his work.

Massey was not only skilled at interpreting the Egyptian data in a highly intelligent and unusual manner, but, having been raised a Protestant Christian compelled to memorize whole sections of the Bible, he was also quite knowledgeable about the scriptures and was able to see the numerous and significant correlations between the Christian and Egyptian religions, or the "mythos and ritual," as he styled them.
If you didn't know this than you didn't read CiE because it's in the introduction. And the quotes from Budge are from CiE and they are plentiful.
I already have observed some distortions in your quotes of Budge. Which brings up the question; How much of his work have you read?
My quotes from Budge? I was quoting sections from the book CiE that we're discussing here and you should have already known that. Look, instead of trying to pretend that you've read this nearly 600 page book full of quotes from Budge and a variety of scholars and Egyptologists you should go ahead and actually read it. There is a ton of Budge's work which demonstrates the antiquity of many Christian motifs and he is very clear about his belief that the Christian religion is the fulfillment of the Egyptian. Budge said that the "influence of ancient Egyptian religious beliefs and mythology on Christianity" would "fill a comparatively large volume." (Budge, GE, I, xvi.) This is on the preface of the book CiE and what Murdock set out to accomplish was to finally provide such a comparatively large volume that Budge had suggested the parallels would fill. The book comprises nearly 600 pages with almost 2,400 footnotes and citations from more than 900 books, journals, and assorted other sources from experts in germane fields of study form different time periods beginning in antiquity up to the most modern Egyptologists, in order to create a consensus of opinion since the topic is so contentious. Brief biographical material is included so that readers may be assured of the individuals credentials. The broad scope of these sources dating from thousands of years ago to the most modern research means there can be no dismissive argument based on either a lack of primary sources or because the authorities cited are "outdated". This is a well written book in response to apologists like yourself who have sought to dismiss all of these many parallels.
Stahrwe wrote:Of late I have been wondering if it is worth the effort since the mythicist position is so marginalized and seems to be collapsing under its own problems.
On the contrary, its gaining among scholarship and laymen alike. And this book was written to do just that. So you have a lot of pages to read and a lot of citations and sources to survey before you can ever hope of trying to put together a refutation attempt that can't be this easily exposed as intellectual dishonesty on your part. Reading some other previous book doesn't mean that you've read the one I'm quoting and discussing here so stop acting as if you have. You're obviously ignorant as to the content of this book as you've been proving each time you respond back to me. So you have a challenge before you now. The Horus-Jesus parallels are all there from well respected sources primary to modern. This information is on the increase currently and is assumably going to gain more in popularity with time...

PS It should be noted that Massey was trying to explain these parallels to Christian audiences and so he made reference to the parallels in Christianity such as the Virgin Birth motif and the motif of the 12 which were a part of the Egyptian religion long before Christianity was created. It was his way of trying to explain it in his day and age. The way that I broke it down previously may better explain the parallels in this day and age with less confusion involved. But nevertheless Massey didn't make these things up and neither has anyone else since. The documentation proves that. And it isn't at all speculative to see parallels between Horus and Jesus as Robert seemed to be suggesting earlier before I posted the documented sources for ZG, it's actually a matter of solid scholarship which is touched on in CiE.
Last edited by tat tvam asi on Mon Jun 28, 2010 5:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Robert Tulip

2B - MOD & SILVER
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6497
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:16 pm
18
Location: Canberra
Has thanked: 2717 times
Been thanked: 2659 times
Contact:
Australia

Re: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

tat tvam asi wrote: it isn't at all speculative to see parallels between Horus and Jesus as Robert seemed to be suggesting earlier before I posted the documented sources for ZG, it's actually a matter of solid scholarship which is touched on in CiE.
Thanks for pointing this out Tat. On reflection, you can see the tactic from KD8 of trying to remake Horus in the image of Jesus, by insisting that the existence of any parallels depends on proof that Horus died on a cross and had twelve disciples. These are Christian images with resonance in Egyptian myth, but obviously the details diverge with Christianity making such strong use of them. Such archetypal themes have parallels in a range of traditions and have evolved through the history of myth. Seeing the close parallel between Jesus and Horus requires putting all their attributes alongside each other for comparison.

On the twelve disciples, the Jewish historian Josephus comments that the 12 jewels of the breastplate of the high priests of Israel represent the twelve signs of the zodiac. The story that Jesus had twelve disciples reflects knowledge of the ancient sacred cosmic symbolism of the number twelve. The source of the archetypal image of the saviour and twelve followers is the sun and the twelve signs of the zodiac.

The cross is an equally cosmic idea. The gates of heaven where the zodiac meets the Milky Way galaxy in Taurus and Scorpio form the cross in the sky. The four creatures around the throne of God in Revelation are the four constellations Taurus, Leo, Scorpio and Aquarius, marking what Ezekiel calls 'wheels within wheels'. The crossing paths of the zodiac and the Milky Way form the Chi Rho Cross in the sky as seen by Constantine at the Milvian Bridge. A summary of the chi rho cross is at http://www.seiyaku.com/customs/crosses/chi-rho.html
Last edited by Robert Tulip on Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
stahrwe

1I - PLATINUM CONTIBUTOR
pets endangered by possible book avalanche
Posts: 4898
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:26 am
14
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 166 times
Been thanked: 315 times

Re: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

tat tvam asi wrote:I just clicked on the active link and went right to it. Perhaps the problem you've been having all along is that you're not simply clicking on the active links. So here's the entire article since you can't manage to do something as basic as to click on the link I've provided:
In exploring the various Egyptian influences upon the Christian religion, one name frequently encountered is that of lay Egyptologist Gerald Massey (1828-1907). Born in abject poverty in England, Gerald Massey was almost entirely self-taught; yet, he was able to write and lecture about several subjects with tremendous erudition and authority. Despite his lack of formal education, Massey could read several languages, including not only English but also French, Latin, Greek and evidently Hebrew and Egyptian to a certain degree.

Massey was fortunate enough to live during an exciting time when Egyptology was in its heyday, with the discovery in 1799 of the Rosetta Stone and the subsequent decipherment of hieroglyphs in 1822 by Champollion. This monumental development allowed for the exposure to light of the fascinating Egyptian culture and religion, meaning that before that time no one could adequately read the Egyptian texts, which Massey ended up spending a considerable portion of his life studying and interpreting, and relatively little was known about the religion, for which Massey possessed a keen sense of comprehension.

In his detailed and careful analysis of the Egyptian religion, the pioneer Massey extensively utilized the Egyptian Book of the Dead--which was termed "The Ritual" by Champollion, a convention followed by Massey and others but since abandoned--as well as several other ancient Egyptian sources, including the Pyramid Texts and assorted other funeral texts and stele. Massey quite evidently understood the Egyptian spirituality and was able to present it in a highly sound and scientific manner.

In these intensive and meticulous efforts, Massey studied the work of the best minds of the time--all towering figures within Egyptology, especially during Massey’s era, when most of them were alive and some were familiar with his work. These celebrated authorities in Egyptology whose works Massey studied and utilized included: Sir Dr. Budge; Dr. Brugsch-Bey; Jean-François Champollion; Dr. Eugene Lefébure; Dr. Karl Richard Lepsius; Sir Dr. Gaston Maspero; Dr. Henri Edouard Naville; Sir Dr. William Flinders Petrie; Dr. Thomas Joseph Pettigrew; Sir Renouf; le vicomte de Rougé; Dr. Samuel Sharpe; and Sir Dr. John Gardner Wilkinson, among many other scholars in a wide variety of fields. As other examples, Massey also used the work of Sir Dr. J. Norman Lockyer, the physicist and royal English astronomer who was friends with Budge and knew Egypt well, along with that of Dr. Charles Piazzi Smyth, royal Scottish astronomer and professor of Astronomy at the University of Edinburgh. Massey further studied the work of Reverend Dr. Archibald Sayce, professor of Comparative Philology at Oxford, as well as that of famous mythologist Sir Dr. James George Frazer, although he did not agree with their conclusions. He likewise cited the work of Francois Lenormant, professor of Archaeology at the National Library of France, as well as that of comparative theologian and Oxford professor Dr. Max Müller, philosopher and Jesus biographer Dr. Ernest Renan, and Christian monuments expert Rev. Dr. John Patterson Lundy.

Gerald Massey was very influenced by the work of Dr. Samuel Birch (1813-1885), archaeologist, Egyptologist and Keeper of the Department of Oriental Antiquities in the British Museum. The creator of the first alphabetically arranged Egyptian dictionary, Dr. Birch also was the founder of the prestigious and influential Society of Biblical Archaeology, to which belonged many other notables in the fields of archaeology, Assyriology, Egyptology and so on. Much of this eye-opening work on comparative religion, in fact, emanated from this august body of erudite and credentialed individuals. Birch held many other titles and honors, including from Cambridge and Oxford Universities. His numerous influential works on Egypt, including the first English translation of the Book of the Dead, were cited for decades in scholarly publications.

In the "Introduction" to his book The Natural Genesis, Gerald Massey writes:

The German Egyptologist, Herr Pietschmann…reviewed the "Book of the Beginnings"... The writer has taken the precaution all through of getting his fundamental facts in Egyptology verified by one of the foremost of living authorities, Dr. Samuel Birch, to whom he returns his heartiest acknowledgements. (Massey, NG, viii)

Dr. Richard Pietschmann was a professor of Egyptology at the University of Göttingen, an impressive "peer reviewer" for one of Massey's early works on Egypt. By verifying his "fundamental facts" with Birch, Massey appears to be saying that his work was also reviewed by Birch, with whom he enjoyed a personal relationship expressed in his letters. Indeed, following this statement in The Natural Genesis, in his "Retort" to various attacks he endured, Massey remarked:

As I also say in my preface [to The Natural Genesis] I took the precaution of consulting Dr. Samuel Birch for many years after he had offered, in his own words, to "keep me straight" as to my facts, obtainable from Egyptian records. He answered my questions, gave me his advice, discussed variant renderings, read whatever proofs I sent him, and corrected me where he saw I was wrong. (Massey, Gerald Massey's Lectures, 251)

It is evident from these remarks that a significant portion of Massey's work was "peer reviewed" by the eminent Dr. Samuel Birch, a remarkable development that should be factored into the assessment of Massey’s work. With such developments, it becomes evident that it is not the quality of Massey’s work at issue, since it is obviously sound, but that his conclusions as to the nonhistoricity and unoriginality of the Christian religion do not sit well with his detractors. This latter fact is critically important to bear in mind when studying Massey's works, especially since he largely discovered and developed parallels between the Egyptian and Christian religions, crucial data that may have otherwise been left to lie fallow based on occupational considerations by the vested-interested professionals upon whose work Massey relied.

Massey was likewise personally friendly with Sir Lockyer (1836-1920), as well as Dr. Birch's protégé Assyriologist Dr. Theophilus Goldridge Pinches (1856-1934). Naturally, among these various scholars of his era, Massey also had his critics, including, apparently, the devout Roman Catholic Renouf, who evidently was a mysterious anonymous Egyptologist who spewed calumny and vitriol at Massey, essentially calling him a lunatic. That Massey was so well known as to draw such attention and ire speaks to his efficacy, rather than his incompetence. As he himself said in his retort to such vituperation, "Such damnation is dirt cheap! Also, the time has passed for denunciation to be mistaken for disproof." (Massey, GML, 250) In his "Retort," Massey also made the following observation, which readers of this present work might wish to keep in mind as well: "I had already warned my readers that they must expect little help from those Egyptologists and Assyriologists who are bibliolaters first and scholars afterwards. Bibliolatry puts out the eye of scholarship or causes confirmed strabismus," the latter term referring to a vision disorder. "Bibliolatry," of course, refers to "Bible worship," while "bibliolaters" are "Bible worshippers."

In his scholarly works on Egypt, in addition to the available Egyptian sources, Gerald Massey utilized numerous other ancient texts, including Judeo-Christian writings such as the Bible, as well as those of early Church fathers such as Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Eusebius, Epiphanius and Jerome. Massey also cited non-Christian, Jewish and Gnostic writers such as Herodotus, Philo, Pausanias and Valentinus, along with writings such as the Talmud and the Hindu Puranas. Having taught himself to read not only English but also several other languages including Egyptian hieroglyphs as well as Sanskrit, providing an extensive comparison between these two languages, Massey scrutinized and interpreted the texts and monuments for himself, such as the Book of the Dead, as well as the famous zodiacs in the Temple of Dendera and the "Nativity Scene" at the Temple of Luxor, texts and images that predated the "Christian era" by centuries to millennia. Regarding his abilities with the hieroglyphs, Massey states:

…although I am able to read the hieroglyphics, nothing offered to you is based on my translation. I work too warily for that! The transcription and literal renderings of the hieroglyphic texts herein employed are by scholars of indisputable authority. There is no loophole of escape that way. (Massey, GML, 1)

Thus, while Massey did read hieroglyphs and therefore worked with primary sources, knowing the contentiousness of the subject, he purposely did not rely on his own translations and interpretations but consulted repeatedly with "scholars of indisputable authority," in other words, those previously mentioned, including Dr. Samuel Birch, with whom Massey conferred personally on much of his work.

Massey was not only skilled at interpreting the Egyptian data in a highly intelligent and unusual manner, but, having been raised a Protestant Christian compelled to memorize whole sections of the Bible, he was also quite knowledgeable about the scriptures and was able to see the numerous and significant correlations between the Christian and Egyptian religions, or the "mythos and ritual," as he styled them.
Massey drops a lot of names but how about some hard citations of where the referenced scholars have validated, in public, Massey's theories? The article you published above is nothing but air, no substance.
n=Infinity
Sum n = -1/12
n=1

where n are natural numbers.
User avatar
tat tvam asi
Reading Addict
Posts: 1367
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:57 pm
14
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 571 times
Been thanked: 549 times

Re: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

What's unclear? Massey was using the Egyptian primary sources and he ran his interpretations of the heiroglyphs by Birch, who corrected him where Birch though correction was necessary. The deal with Massey is that we only have so much to go by and a lot of it comes from his remaining letters. The above is an exert from CiE. She goes ahead and uses some quotes from Massey in CiE on the grounds that he had some very clear understanding of how the Egyptian religion relates to the Christian. But, Massey is not the foundation stone by any means. He is used as but one small voice among a long list of scholars and sources from ancient to modern times that confirm the parallels between the Egyptian and Christian religions. So that Massey's detractors, like yourself, have no where to turn when the mountain of scholarship coming both before and after Massey's time overwhelms them completely and goes to show that he wasn't that far off at all. It's just that Christian apologists are out to destroy anyone and anything that raises contrary opinions to their historical and originality claims. You're doing it right now in public view.

What I'm wondering at this point is why you've bothered to post again in this thread without reading the book? Go after the citations and look up every source. It's all there waiting for your attention. Your posts are all premature as you haven't even researched this issue in depth yet at all. You didn't know anything about Birch until I just posted the article.
Stahrwe wrote:Additionally, peer review usually requires more than one person. Dr. Samuel Birch seems to be a rather obscure scholar. Wikipedia only references one book under the category Publications in the article on him (no wonder you hate my use of encyclopedias). 1858 History of Ancient Pottery: Egyptian, Assyrian, and Greek. Two volumes. John Murray, London.

You went encyclopedia surfing and turned up nothing. Meanwhile:
Gerald Massey was very influenced by the work of Dr. Samuel Birch (1813-1885), archaeologist, Egyptologist and Keeper of the Department of Oriental Antiquities in the British Museum. The creator of the first alphabetically arranged Egyptian dictionary, Dr. Birch also was the founder of the prestigious and influential Society of Biblical Archaeology, to which belonged many other notables in the fields of archaeology, Assyriology, Egyptology and so on. Much of this eye-opening work on comparative religion, in fact, emanated from this august body of erudite and credentialed individuals. Birch held many other titles and honors, including from Cambridge and Oxford Universities. His numerous influential works on Egypt, including the first English translation of the Book of the Dead, were cited for decades in scholarly publications.
Then you change your direction after I post more of the article and say, in attempt to 'raise the bar':
Stahrwe wrote:Massey drops a lot of names but how about some hard citations of where the referenced scholars have validated, in public, Massey's theories? The article you published above is nothing but air, no substance.
You thought there was only one name previously. That's because I posted a quote that only named Birch at first and you hadn't read the link nor CiE in order to be aware of all of the other names that are brought up as well. It's clear that you don't have any clue as to what you're talking about. You're doing the very same thing that KD8 has been doing and that's why the administrator has come down on KD8's intellectual dishonesty in the way that he has. You guys make it clear that you're not interested in knowing the sources, you're only interest is in wave of the hand dismissals until you're cornered at which point you immediately resort to 'raising the bar'. Just study the work for crying out loud! Are you too frightened to do so? Afraid of what you'll uncover when you get in depth into this research?
Post Reply

Return to “Religion & Philosophy”