ZEITGEIST, The Movie

snip

"Virgo" is a Greek name and not transferrable to all cultures and religions just because a film says so.

snip

Though I'm sure you didn't mean this literally, I would point out that Virgo is technically just the Latin translation of the Greek name Ptolemy gave to the constellation, which was Parthenos, also meaning "virgin" of course.
 
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post

Quote:
The myth described Osiris as having been killed by his brother Seth who wanted Osiris' throne. Isis briefly brought Osiris back to life by use of a spell that she learned from her father. This spell gave her time to become pregnant by Osiris before he again died. Isis later gave birth to Horus. As such, since Horus was born after Osiris' resurrection, Horus became thought of as representing new beginnings. This combination, Osiris-Horus, was therefore a life-death-rebirth deity, and thus associated with the new harvest each year.


GreNME
What part of "this combination, Osiris-Horus" was amiguous to you? The fact is that Osiris is the one who died and came back to life. There is absolutely no way for you to claim otherwise. Can you honestly not just admit you are incorrect and move on?



I can find no references to Horus EVER dying, until he later becomes "merged" with Re the Sun god, after which he 'dies' and is 'reborn' every single day as the sun rises. And even in this 'death', there is no reference to a tomb anywhere.

Walk Like an Egyptian
Comparing Osiris, Horus, and Jesus
James Patrick Holding
 
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post

Quote:
The myth described Osiris as having been killed by his brother Seth who wanted Osiris' throne. Isis briefly brought Osiris back to life by use of a spell that she learned from her father. This spell gave her time to become pregnant by Osiris before he again died. Isis later gave birth to Horus. As such, since Horus was born after Osiris' resurrection, Horus became thought of as representing new beginnings. This combination, Osiris-Horus, was therefore a life-death-rebirth deity, and thus associated with the new harvest each year.


GreNME
What part of "this combination, Osiris-Horus" was amiguous to you? The fact is that Osiris is the one who died and came back to life. There is absolutely no way for you to claim otherwise. Can you honestly not just admit you are incorrect and move on?



I can find no references to Horus EVER dying, until he later becomes "merged" with Re the Sun god, after which he 'dies' and is 'reborn' every single day as the sun rises. And even in this 'death', there is no reference to a tomb anywhere.

Walk Like an Egyptian
Comparing Osiris, Horus, and Jesus
James Patrick Holding

In Western Qabalah, Osiris is the Son, Horus the Father, Isis the Mother. They are often assigned around the edges of the 345 triangle thus... Horus 3, Isis 4, Osiris 5.

Thus, in this system, Osiris is the symbolic progeny of the other two. In some ways it could be said that Osiris is Horus risen.

Thus, I'd say, Jesus is nearer to Osiris rather than Horus. BUT...it's believed that Christ, Khiram (Abif), Krishna, and Horus are all from the same semantic root (Kh) and represent essentially the same principle.


Thus, one might say Jesus Christ represents an amalgam of Horus-Osiris.

This is reinforced when one considers that Jesus + Christ, in Greek numerology (isosephia) is 888 + 1480, which by ratio reduces to 3:5, implying Father - Son.


To drag Moses in a bit (!), his Hebrew numberology is 345 (mem, shin, heh).

Nick

ps - This, I'd say, is fairly mainstream Western Qabalah (Western Mysteries Tradition, WMT). To move further away from the core, into the less explored and more contentious realms of Greek biblical numerology, one might note Rev 1:1 "This is the Revelation of Jesus Christ" is "Apocalysis Iesou Christos" which equals 1512 + 888 + 1480 = 3880. Helios, the Sun, equals 388. Some writers have it that multiplying numbers by 10 in the Greek New Testament implies a "risen" aspect. Thus, "this is the revelation of Jesus Christ" equals "this is the risen Sun/Son."
 
Though I'm sure you didn't mean this literally, I would point out that Virgo is technically just the Latin translation of the Greek name Ptolemy gave to the constellation, which was Parthenos, also meaning "virgin" of course.
I don't think "literally" would be the best description for what I was not referring to. "Transliterally" would be more appropriate to what it isn't. Basically, the Greek name given to the constellation specifically does not transliterate to Babylonian and Egyptian counterparts. :)

I can find no references to Horus EVER dying, until he later becomes "merged" with Re the Sun god, after which he 'dies' and is 'reborn' every single day as the sun rises. And even in this 'death', there is no reference to a tomb anywhere.

Walk Like an Egyptian
Comparing Osiris, Horus, and Jesus
James Patrick Holding
Indeed. That is a good example of what I was talking about early on (and in my PDF) about how none of them, including Osiris and Horus in particular, have any consistently similar themes able to be easily associated with Judaism or Christianity unless the person asserting it is specifically cherry-picking periods in mythological history to the exemption of precedeing and subsequent changes in that myth over time.

After all, why go through all the trouble of cherry-picking through Egyptian myth when there are direct Sumerian stories that are practically the same? Why try to jump through logical hoops to connect dating and astrology from Egypt and Greece to the Hebrews when Babylonian models fit almost perfectly in many more areas (in similarity, proximity, and on a timeline)?

Since we're two pages on from the last time it was mentioned: I make no claim to prove or disprove anyone's religion, by the way. I have no problem admitting my own agnosticism and lack of faith in any of the religion and mythology, but I have no goal to alter that faith in anyone else. I care about the historical, cultural, and archaeological (redundant?) studies from those times and regions, and what they tell us about how we got where we did. None of this is meant (by me) to show one way or the other that anyone else's personal religious faith is "true" or "untrue" in any sense.

ETA - Nick: as an aside, is Farsi familiar to you? If so, that would explain the influence of the alphabet character spellings I was correcting you on earlier, at which point I would owe you an apology.
 
Last edited:
GreNME,

Thanks for the link to your PDF. I will read up.

I am keeping out of the rest of this discussion.. I do not have a good enough grasp of history to contribute in a meaningful way.

When the subject turns to MJ-12, I'll pipe in. I'm old school CT.

Cheers
 
I will have more for you later GreNME but until then...
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/astrology-articles/astrology-history.php

Astrology History

Role of Egypt in the history of astrology

Astrology has played a major role in society since the beginning of civilization, and maybe even before that. Its influence can be seen in almost every part of the world. Astrology's history is a long one, and common belief is that its origins lie with the Greeks. However, a closer look shows that the foundations for astrology were laid much earlier than that, and the Egyptians had much to do with this. The Egyptian influence will be discussed shortly; but first, it will be very helpful to describe the history of astrology up to the point that the Egyptians became involved.

The Sumerians, who settled in Mesopotamia around 4000 BC, mark the first example of a people who worshipped the sun, moon, and Venus. They considered these heavenly bodies gods, or the homes of gods. The moon god's name was Nanna, the sun god was called Utu, and the god of Venus was named Inanna. These were not the only gods the Sumerians worshipped; in fact, other gods, especially those of creation, were more important in the Sumerian pantheon. The Akkandians, near Sumer, adopted the sun, moon and Venus gods, changing their names. This was common with the gods in ancient times: the gods were accepted by a society, but their names were changed, depending on who had conquered whom.

The priests of the time who communicated with the gods were the first rulers. Temple systems were created and staffs of as many as several hundred to several thousand people in various roles were "employed" to fulfill various needs of the priests. There were junior priests, counselors, musicians, potters, etc. Later, it became necessary to have military leaders and some of these became kings. These kings usually had in their company a seer, or "baru-priest." This person was an interpreter of the skies -- he would read the sky for warnings, which usually involved eclipses of the moon. It could be said that the "baru-priests" were the first actual astrologers. In order to be able to communicate with the gods, mounds were built which represented shrines. These, over time, grew to larger structures called "ziggurats." (Later, these ziggurats would be used to map the star formations and to watch the sky for omens.)

The Sumerian baru-priests were under quite a bit of pressure to predict correctly. Predictions became more an art than science, since the priests had to be a bit crafty in their work. They did succeed in predicting eclipses with correct mathematics; thus contributing greatly to the later development of the laws of astronomy. (It may be useful at this point for some to make the distinction between astrology and astronomy. Astronomy is the scientific study of the stars and planets and their movements. Astrology is the pseudoscientific study of the influence those heavenly bodies and their movements have on humankind.) Astrology as we, or even the ancient Greeks, would consider it did not exist at this time. The priests were concerned with predicting natural events (weather, eclipses, etc.) in order to maintain their power. Their efforts, however, did contribute to the development of astrology -- they designed a calendar; identified the basic cycles of the sun, moon, planets and stars; and divided their year into twelve months based on the moon's twelve cycles during a year.

The beginnings of actual astrology can be seen during the Old Babylonian period, during the second millennium. The focus of the Babylonians was on the well-being of the kingdom and the king, not of the individual. For this reason, predictions revolved around things that would affect this well-being. The Babylonian priests correctly documented Venus's appearances and disappearances and because of this erratic behavior (due to the fact that Venus revolves about the sun backwards) Venus became associated with love and war. Somewhere around 1300 BC, the precursors of the individual birth horoscopes were formulated. These were merely predictions based on which month a child was born in. By this time the astral bodies have become quite significant at this point.

The Assyrian Era marked a new phase in the development of astrology. This time period lasted from about 1300 to 600 BC The Assyrians conquered Babylon in 729 BC, and the inevitable changing of the gods occurred. At this time, the sun god, called Shamash now, was deemed high god. The state was still considered more important than the individual; thus the omens and predictions were still directed at the events that would affect the state. The Assyrians overcame a long time problem -- they created a consistent and accurate calendar. Star maps were plotted correctly, constellations were formed, and astrolabes, or lists of stars were made. Omens were very important to the Assyrians and the priests-astrologers-astronomers would present their omens to the courts often. Those who could forecast good things were well-respected.

As mentioned above, the Assyrians had developed constellations. In fact, they plotted eighteen all together. Later, by 600 BC, some of these would be combined and some would be deleted to form the twelve constellations of the zodiac. There is a certain amount of controversy over just how these constellations were named. The following is a list of the names: the Latin name first -- the name we are most familiar with, then the Babylonian name. Much of astrology today is based on the relationships these constellations have with the seasons. The constellations should not be confused with the traditional signs of the zodiac, as the latter had not yet been created.

The Assyrians placed as much or even more importance on the five planets they had identified and their movements into these constellations. The reason for this is that they believed the planets were gods or at least the home of gods. The names given to these planets as well as the sun and moon were eventually replaced by the Greek names, then the Roman names, and eventually the English names. In Assyrian times the names were as follows: Sun=Shamash, Moon=Sin, Venus=Ishtar, Mercury=Nebo or Nabu, Mars=Nergal, Saturn=Ninurta, and Jupiter=Marduk. The various personalities and domains of these gods changed with time and change of rulership.

The next phase in the history of astrology is the New Babylonian period (600-300 BC). Some of the prominent astrologers of this period were Kiddinu, Berossus, Antipatrus, Achinopoulus, and Sudines. Up to this point, really the only kind of astrology being practiced was omen astrology, or the foretelling of major events. It was during the New Babylonian period that the signs of the zodiac were invented and horoscope, or birth, astrology had its beginnings. As of 1996, sixteen Babylonian horoscopes have been found and it was not uncommon for these horoscopes to contain little or no prediction. They mostly consist of the position of the skies at the time of conception or birth of the individual.

The Greeks began their immense influence on astrology during the fifth and fourth centuries BC. Alexander the Great managed to spread the Greek way of life, also known as Hellenism, to places such as Alexandria and Antioch. The Hellenistic period spanned from the time of his death in 323 BC to the middle of the second century BC, when the Romans took the eastern Mediterranean. The Greeks were responsible for incorporating mythology into astrology. The names we are familiar with today when we think of mythology came into existence. Up to this point, the same gods existed, just under different names and personalities.

This was the age of such famous forerunners of modern science as Plato, Pythagoras, who asserted that the earth was round and traveled around the sun; Leucippus, whose theory would later be the beginnings of atomic science; and Aristotle. Other scientists involved with the study of astronomy, such as Eudoxus, held the opinion that astrology was ridiculous and no one should believe prediction about his life based on which day he was born. Nevertheless, astrologers such as Critodemus, Apollonius of Myndus, and Epigenes of Byzantium continued to refine horoscopic astrology.

The Romans were not as accepting of astrology. About 250 BC, a large number of the common citizenry became interested in astrology, but the conservatives fought against most any outside religion, including Christianity. They presented quite logical arguments against the use of astrology and horoscopes, saying that people born on the same day at the same time had very different destinies, and that people born on different days at different times sometimes died at the same times. Nevertheless, astrology spread into Rome, despite several attempts to expel all astrologers from the empire. Eventually, astrology gained acceptance, mostly because the Romans had a certain respect for the Greeks' education. If the Romans had not finally allowed astrology into their culture, things might have been very different as far as the Egyptians' contributions to the art.

In 331 BC, Alexander the Great founded the city of Alexandria. This marks the beginning of the Graeco-Roman period in Egypt's history. Alexandria became one of the most famous of the Hellenistic capitals. Hellenism is the term describing the Greek way of life. The people of Alexandria retained some of their Egyptian culture, but it became mixed with that of the Greeks, Romans, Macedonians, Persians, Syrians, Jewish, and Chaldeans. When the Roman Empire began its decline, Alexandria managed to maintain its prestige as a center for cultural activity. By the time Alexandria began its decline, the scientific revolution was over, and astrology was accepted and believed by almost everyone. It was at this time that Claudius Ptolemy surfaced.

Almost nothing is known about Claudius Ptolemy. It is known that he was not Greek and was not even a Ptolemy (that is, he was not related to the Ptolemaic rulers). He was an Egyptian astronomer, mathematician, and geographer who lived in the vicinity of Alexandria. Bits and pieces of information from his writings and from comments from his contemporaries are the only sources of information about Ptolemy's life. He was born in Upper Egypt, and some say that he was the head librarian at the museum or library at Alexandria.

Ptolemy worked from the data of past astrologers to map over one thousand stars. He compiled a list of 48 constellations, and, for the most part, described the longitude and latitude lines of the earth. He was a believer that the earth was the center of the universe and worked to advance this theory. His effort in this area was in his thirteen volume work called the Almagest. Here, the Ptolemaic system is described, thus explaining why some planets seemed to move backwards for periods of time in their orbit around earth. He theorized that each planet also revolved in a smaller circle as well as a larger one. This was called the "epicycle." This theory would survive for 1400 years, until it was finally accepted that the earth was itself another planet in orbit around the sun.

Ptolemy also dabbled in other areas of study. He wrote the book, Geography, and in it created maps and latitudes and longitudes. He studied the refraction of light in his book, Optics. Also, he studied harmonics and wrote yet another book describing his findings. However, it was his work called Mathematical Treatise in Four Books, also referred to as The Prognostics Addressed to Syrus, that would be the foundation for modern astrology as it is practiced in the West. The name we use for the work today is the Tetrabiblos. Nothing is known about how Ptolemy acquired his data for this work; however, his access to the library at Alexandria would be the best guess.

No original version of the Tetrabiblos still exists. All that remain are translations and copies of it, the oldest of which is Arabic and dates only to AD 900. Eventually, the Latin translations became familiar to the Europeans. The English version was translated from that of the Greeks in 1940. There were four books to this work, and each dealt with a different aspect of astrology:

The first book defined Ptolemy's reasoning for practicing astrology as well as astronomy, for by this time, there were many who opposed astrology. He said that it should not be abandoned merely because there are a few people who abuse it. This book also deals with the various alignments of planets, the moon, and the sun. Ptolemy describes in detail which positions are favorable and which are not. He also explained the signs, when they begin, and why they begin there.

The second book of the Tetrabiblos describes astrology as it relates to countries. Ptolemy makes the point that astrological events of countries and race supersede those of the individual. He details which planets rule over which country, and makes the distinction between human signs and animal signs. He notes that human signs cause things to happen to humans and animal signs affect animals. Finally, Ptolemy explains how the planets affect earth. For example, Saturn was thought to cause cold, floods, poverty, and death. Mars caused war and drought. Comets and shooting stars were thought to also affect the weather.

The third book dealt with the individual. The Tetrabiblos examined conception and birth, saying that it was better to work with the conception date and that this date should be known by observation. Several key factors were involved with this aspect of astrology. The sign that was rising at the time of conception, the moon's phase, and the movements of the planets were all taken into consideration. The father's influence was shown through the sun and Saturn, while the mother's was shown through the moon and Venus.

Finally, the forth book of the Tetrabiblos handled matters of occupation, marriage, children, travel, and "houses" of the zodiac. The particular angles of various planets were used to calculate these things.

The Tetrabiblos compiled almost all of the astrological works up to that point. Only very few modifications have been made since then, and most of what we know as astrology comes from this work. Critics claim that it is "tedious and dry" to read, and that there are some contradictions in Ptolemy's ideas. Furthermore, he did not take into account the precession of the equinoxes. He undoubtedly knew about this phenomenon, an overlapping between signs and constellations that gets larger over time (about 5 degrees per three hundred years), but why he did not examine or explain this is a mystery and one of the biggest flaws of his work.

There were also problems with his correlation between astrology and the seasons. His belief that the conception time was preferable to birth time is a misguided one, as conception time for an individual is actually rather difficult to calculate. There were other errors in his work, mostly dealing with beliefs of the time and misinformation about astronomy; however, for the most part, the Tetrabiblos has proved invaluable to this day.

Ptolemy himself seemed to be quite egotistical. It is thought that he may never have actually practiced astrology, and there has not been a single horoscope found that was created by him. Some say that his writing almost reflects an embarrassment about astrology, and suggest that perhaps he might not have been a scholar of the art, but more a reporter of it.

Probably the most disturbing accusation against Ptolemy is that his figures were intentionally skewed and doctored to fit his hypotheses. A study of Ptolemy's figures was done in 1977, and the findings were that most of his data was fraudulent. For more on this subject, one should refer to the book by R. Newton, The Crime of Claudius Ptolemy. It is hard to hold this against Ptolemy; he was, of course, working in ancient times. However, had he used correct numbers in his work, it might not have taken future scholars 1400 more years to correct wrong ideas concerning the universe.

In his defense, he was living during a time when "politically incorrect" beliefs could be grounds for punishment. It actually may not have been safe for him to expose the truth; instead he may have been forced to make his numbers fit into incorrect theories. He knew enough about the truth...the precession of the equinoxes and the theories that postulated that the earth, in fact, revolved around the sun. Apparently, fear for his own life is the reason why he did not act on his knowledge.

After Ptolemy, many astrologers followed. Some notable Egyptians in the field were Paul of Alexandria, Hephaestion of Thebes, and Palchus, though little other than their names are known about these people. Ptolemy's work was continued and commented on by the Alexandrian mathematician Pappus, the mathematician/astronomer Theon of Alexandria, and the Greek mathematician Proclus, who wrote a paraphrase of Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos.

After about AD 500, astrology died away for a while. It came alive again in the eighth century when Islam began practicing Hellenistic astrology. It was Albumasar, a Muslim intellectual, who was instrumental in bringing astrology as we know it to the Western world.

In conclusion, it can be said that Egypt has played a major role in the development of astrology. Egypt has had the pleasure of experiencing many different cultures in its land, which has enriched Egypt's history and aided its people to become innovators of new ideas that would last for centuries and even on into today.
 
After all, why go through all the trouble of cherry-picking through Egyptian myth when there are direct Sumerian stories that are practically the same? Why try to jump through logical hoops to connect dating and astrology from Egypt and Greece to the Hebrews when Babylonian models fit almost perfectly in many more areas (in similarity, proximity, and on a timeline)?

What we are talking about is explaining the similarities by comparing how these cultures affected each other throughout history. We are talking about How point A-Babylonian Myth...led to point D or E where we have christian myth. You don't need to cherry pick when there is a clear line between them all.
 
Are you really claiming that the astrological zodiac signs line up directly with the astronomical constellations

No...what I am "claiming" is that astrology played a significant role in the creation of mythos, and if you trace the mythological symbolism you see it transposed across many cultures because the star positions were the same regardless of the culture. These cultures cross pollinated various idea's related to the development of religion and this is why we see an across the board similarity. Just because these mythos are not literally identical doesn't mean that there wasn't influence from the egyptians... or the babylonians, or the greeks...or whomever....your getting so hung up on the finite minutiae that seperates them that you are unable to see the broader picture...step back a little. Of course cultures are going to have their unique qualities, but as history clearly demonstrates...the mythos travels and evolves with the people...so there are going to inevitably be similarities and there will be differences based on local culture, environment..etc...
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legend_of_Osiris_and_Isis

In the Ennead, Osiris is the husband of Isis, and sibling of Set, all of whom are the great-grandchildren of the creator god Atum, and Horus is not present within the system. In the Ogdoad, Osiris is not present within the system, and Horus is son of Ra, the creator god. When the Ennead and Ogdoad merged, Ra and Amun were identified as one-another, becoming Amun-Ra, and Horus was initially considered the fifth sibling of Osiris, Isis, Nephthys and Set. However, Horus' mother, Hathor, gradually became identified as a form of Isis, leading to Horus becoming said to be Isis' son, and therefore the son of Osiris.

In this reading how does horus not represent a similarity to jesus...first he is the son of ra(light/the creator), then he morphs with the culture to be the son of Osiris who is the god of the under world. The whole mythology of Isis/Osiris/Horus rings with similarities to the immaculate conception, the holy trinity, death and resurrection...etc


Ultimately, as another sun god, Horus became identified with Ra as Ra-Herakhty However, this identification proved to be awkward, for it made Ra the son of Hathor, and therefore a created being rather than the creator. And, even worse, it made Ra into Horus, who was the son of Ra, i.e. it made Ra his own son and father, in a standard sexually-reproductive manner, an idea that would not be considered comprehensible to the Egyptians until the Hellenic era. Consequently Ra and Horus never completely merged into a single falcon-headed sun god.

How does this not sound like the situation of Jesus being son of man and son of God...and not only the son...but the personification of God, and thus his own father? I guess what I am getting at is that the Zeitgeist version of events is a flawed over simplification, but the analogy still holds true....any way...back to it.
 
Nick,
That was some sexy math.

GreNME,
Are you a robot? Why do you not wish to impose your will on others?

thesyntaxera,
This was common with the gods in ancient times: the gods were accepted by a society, but their names were changed, depending on who had conquered whom.
YUP!
 

Utterly preposterous and complete tautology. For example, the following two conclusions do not agree with each other:

"Astrology has played a major role in society since the beginning of civilization, and maybe even before that... However, a closer look shows that the foundations for astrology were laid much earlier than that, and the Egyptians had much to do with this."

"The beginnings of actual astrology can be seen during the Old Babylonian period, during the second millennium."

The link does absolutely nothing to actually connect the ancient Sumerians and Babylonians in any kind of linear or cultural fashion as being influenced by Egypt. It would be impossible for them to do so, because those civilizations interacted in only one notable fashion: fighting. The people of Mesopotamia dealt primarily with the Mediterranian and Indus River Valley peoples, both with trade and, in various periods, fighting invasions. That is, when they weren't fighting each other-- Mesopotamia was extremely divided for long periods. The dynasties of Egypt were focused more on North and Central Africa, where their people originated. The only exception was the Hyksos 'invasion' and rule, which would actually lend more argument against claims of an Egyptian astrological origin, since these people from Canaan and the Indus River Valley wound up imposing their own religious mythologies on the Egyptians, not the other way around.

Interestingly (and predictably), though, your own link does go far enough to contradict your attempts to link the different mythologies from separate civilizations in the course of its "explanation" by pointing out:

"The various personalities and domains of these gods changed with time and change of rulership."

Whoops. Guess you missed that in your earnest. :)

GreNME said:
After all, why go through all the trouble of cherry-picking through Egyptian myth when there are direct Sumerian stories that are practically the same? Why try to jump through logical hoops to connect dating and astrology from Egypt and Greece to the Hebrews when Babylonian models fit almost perfectly in many more areas (in similarity, proximity, and on a timeline)?
What we are talking about is explaining the similarities by comparing how these cultures affected each other throughout history. We are talking about How point A-Babylonian Myth...led to point D or E where we have christian myth. You don't need to cherry pick when there is a clear line between them all.

Except that the linear link you are describing doesn't exist. Just to remind you from your previous link: "The various personalities and domains of these gods changed with time and change of rulership."

I also feel the need to point out that you've shifted from claiming an Egyptian origin in this quote to a more-correct-but-still-not-quite-right claim of Babylonian origin. It's nice to see that either I'm getting through to you a little bit or my constant challenges to your claims are now pointing you to information that is altering your original assertions. :)

You come across as much more original and educated about a subject when you can put things in your own words. Just an observation.

If it's a link-war you want, though:
  • A Critical Examination of "Wordprinting" from BYU - interestingly, a debunking of earlier LDS claims, which basically amount to saying that similarities in words and phrases are proof of validity and authenticity. The reasons why such claims are flawed are discussed in the link.
  • Coincidental Similarities - a list of words collected by a linguist showing words that have similar meanings in languages that have absolutely no root relations. This displays how easy it is to make up fictitious claims based on unrelated similarities.
  • Transfigured On The Holy Mountain: The Beginnings of Christianity - by Earl Doherty. A pretty good article on the subject matter, and well-written. Also, it leads to his supplementals, like...
  • Josephus Unbound: Reopening the Josephus Question - also by Earl Doherty. A supplemental to the previous link, and one of 11 supplemental articles. I suggest them all for some interesting reading.
  • Old Testament Life and Literature by Gerald Larue. This is an excellent scholarly resource, and even if you don't bother looking at it in the scope of this discussion I still highly recommend you checking the publication out and bookmarking it for future study.
  • Special link for Nick: Joseph Smith and Kabbalah by Lance Owens. Thought you might find it interesting. :)

I know it isn't Wikipedia-like summaries and footnotes, but I'm sure that a little patience and some of the perserverence you've been displaying in this thread should get you through them.


No...what I am "claiming" is that astrology played a significant role in the creation of mythos, and if you trace the mythological symbolism you see it transposed across many cultures because the star positions were the same regardless of the culture. These cultures cross pollinated various idea's related to the development of religion and this is why we see an across the board similarity. Just because these mythos are not literally identical doesn't mean that there wasn't influence from the egyptians... or the babylonians, or the greeks...or whomever....your getting so hung up on the finite minutiae that seperates them that you are unable to see the broader picture...step back a little. Of course cultures are going to have their unique qualities, but as history clearly demonstrates...the mythos travels and evolves with the people...so there are going to inevitably be similarities and there will be differences based on local culture, environment..etc...

Wow. So, you're basically telling me to "step back" from all of those troublesome details like the factual historical data, cultural contexts and obstacles for transmission of ideas (like geography or language)... you know, all of those pesky things that clearly point out just how wrong you are with your broad over-generalizations and assertion of significance to unrelated criteria?

Can I ask you if you are honestly taking me seriously at all? I mean, if you are completely unwilling to take me seriously and actually consider that I just might have equal or greater study on the subjects we're talking about here, then what is the point of discussing this with me? I certainly wouldn't be challenging your constantly-contradictory references to Wikipedia if I thought you weren't working from a source that has more depth of information and more thorough study. You did, by the way, allude to having studied this kind of topic (history? archaeology? religion? astrology?) for years. I wouldn't be continuing to challenge your assertions if I did not mean to give you the opportunity to actually display these years of study. Instead, you're telling me to "step back" and not look at any contextual data? Are you joking?

Before you answer, though: to reply to your "mythos travels and evolves with the people" comment-- while it is heartening to see you are now questioning the order in which the civilizational origins were placed, you're still burdened by some significant flaws. Myths didn't "travel" and "evolve" in any manner like you have, up to this point, described or asserted. They definitely didn't do so in the manner that is described in the film Zeitgeist. Lastly, you need to get off this "astrology played a significant role" assertion because it is unsupportable without the tautology of using astrology as a reference. Astroomy was an influence, I would agree, but you have already done me the service of showing through one of your Wikipedia links that astrology and astronomy are do not coincide with each other, despite both of them originating from patterns in the stars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legend_of_Osiris_and_Isis

In this reading how does horus not represent a similarity to jesus...first he is the son of ra(light/the creator), then he morphs with the culture to be the son of Osiris who is the god of the under world. The whole mythology of Isis/Osiris/Horus rings with similarities to the immaculate conception, the holy trinity, death and resurrection...etc
I really must give you credit for your tenacity, but I wonder if you realize how often you are asking me to judge only from the specific examples you give under only their own interpretation, without context, at the exclusion of the thousands of years of mythological history that do not coincide with your assertion at all and, in some places, actually outright contradict them.

This is why attempting to link two unrelated civilizations by claiming similarities that require great leaps of interpretation are not only summarily dismissed in the scholarly world as being without merit, but are indicative of someone who is working from complete ignorance to the subject in the first place.

I strongly recommend, if you are truly interested in performing some real study on the subject of the origins of the Jesus myth and as such the beginnings of Christianity, begin anywhere you like in this comprehensive list of publications. It is becoming clear that nothing I say is going to actually alter your preconceived notions, and these other authors not only have far more information than I can shoot back in the space of a forum post, but many of them say it better than I have.

To sum up the flaws in both your argument and the film:
  1. Correlation does not imply causation.
  2. Similarities do not imply a relationship.
  3. Placing events or symbols out of (linear) order reduces the probability that such events occurred the way you claim.
  4. Quoting historical "facts" or words without supplying context puts them out of their location, time, and and application.
  5. Repetition does not make something more true, only repetitive.


How does this not sound like the situation of Jesus being son of man and son of God...and not only the son...but the personification of God, and thus his own father? I guess what I am getting at is that the Zeitgeist version of events is a flawed over simplification, but the analogy still holds true....any way...back to it.

I understand what you are maintaining. And I keep having to repeat myself: correlation does not mean causation. Similarities in small, specific selected instances do not imply a relationship. These two flawed tactics are the only techniques used to associate Christianity with Egyptian mysticism.

However...

I had a friend and fellow study give me an article today written by a linguist concerning the errors in language usage in the Book of Mormon and other things written by Joseph Smith. You may be very interested to know that Joseph Smith was very adamant about the supposed connections between the Hebrews and the Egyptians, claiming also that the BoM is translated from an altered (revised) version of the Egyptian heiroglyph written language. After reading more on the beginnings of the LDS faith and Joseph Smith, along with the basic origins of the Masons (and the loads of conspiracy material about that group), I can see how and why there are so many "sources" claiming to have reputable "research" connecting the Jews (and, by proxy, Christians) to Egyptian mythology."

This helps to lay some foundational context for the basis of these conspiracies. It seems to be that the Christianity::Egypt comparisons are coming from a heavy anti-Mason and / or anti-Mormon basis. The anti-Fed/international financing/fiat money system movement has a very heavy basis in early-20th-century xenophobic literature (which, in turn, has some other cultural/religious history-- see Constantine's Sword by James Carroll for some separate but appropriate information on that). The 9/11 conspiracy stuff seems to be a hybrid of the previous two mixed with a strong anti-federalism. Certainly helpful in establishing where the accusations are actually heading, in my opinion, and a good explanation of why the movements come not only from a very extreme right-wing ideology (not synonymous with the Republican Party or any other political organization, just an ideological origin) with some heavy fundementalist Christian biases, depending on the conspiracy in question and the focuses of the theory itself (the anti-Masons and "Bohemian Grove" ones in particular).
 
GreNME,
Are you a robot? Why do you not wish to impose your will on others?

Because there's no reason for me to do so? I'm obviously willing to share my ideas and my thoughts, as I hope I've displayed here. I don't think that a world where everyone else thinks or feels like I do would be very interesting, challenging, or edifying. :)
 
Because there's no reason for me to do so? I'm obviously willing to share my ideas and my thoughts, as I hope I've displayed here. I don't think that a world where everyone else thinks or feels like I do would be very interesting, challenging, or edifying. :)

I don't know how many times I am going to need to restate my thesis...but here it goes..yet again...

As long as there has been people the stars have been observed and mythologized...once a solid civilization came into existence(mesopotamia) the star postions have been recorded with increasing accuracy moving from mesopotamia to the egyptians/indian and on into the greek and so forth...the history of the expanse of human civilization is the means by which you can see it complexify and evolve...a simple cross comparison of myths from these societies and the similarities that one finds is a sign that cultures have borrowed idea's from each other as they have interacted over time, and spread across europe and asia...it's not even in question. There is absolutely no way that so many cultures in such a relatively close proximity could have avoided this inevitability totally. It is foolish to think that as these cultures evolved they wouldn't develop seperate idea's, however the fact that the seeds of these idea's being planted earlier cannot be overlooked, and must be taken into consideration when examining how the idea's played out in different cultures...therefore, correlation equal correlation...causation happened much earlier....the basic myths were already in place. That origin is the causation that causes correlation to occur.

Like I said already...you are so hung up on the tiny differences that would ultimately evolve out of these cultures anyway, that you can't see the bigger picture...memetic evolution over time, due to the interactions of coexisting cultures.
 
Nick,
That was some sexy math.

GreNME,
Are you a robot? Why do you not wish to impose your will on others?

thesyntaxera,
This was common with the gods in ancient times: the gods were accepted by a society, but their names were changed, depending on who had conquered whom.
YUP!

Thats what I am saying!!! Thank you! And that was some sexy math...I have been meaning to read about gematria for awhile.
 
http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2006/04/23/but-did-they-also-influence-christianity/

We know they invented...


the concept of modern time

The Egyptians invented the 365 day calendar, which they split up into 12 months. They also invented the sundial, which helped them to break down the day into morning, afternoon and night.


grooming instruments and hand tools

The Egyptians are credited with inventing scissors, hair combs, the toothbrush and toothpaste, and cosmetics. Other tools include the lock and key, the loom, oil lamps and the drum.


board games

The Egyptians created board games for recreation. The most popular were Senet and Jackals, each player receiving 5 or more pawns, similar to checkers. They also invented the Ouija board, used to tell the future.


advanced mathematics

The Egyptians developed an advanced math and organized science system. They invented math to measure time, count money, and to build the pyramids. Some classifications they invented include geometry, calculus, astronomy and botany.

But did they also influence Christianity?

A long time ago, a man was born of a virgin in the likeness of God. After spreading messages of love and peace in his early life, he was betrayed by his friends and slain on a slab of wood. He was then resurrected on Earth before returning to heaven.

The man’s name isn’t Jesus. It’s Osiris, the god-man of ancient Egypt.

Didn’t hear this in Bible study? No wonder; Osiris is thought to have lived a good 2,500 years before Jesus’ birth. Although the significance of Osiris, who was considered “god of the dead,” paled in comparison to that of Christ’s, the two men’s stories are strikingly similar.

It’s not by accident, said Lisa Ann Bargeman, author of a new book, “The Egyptian Origins of Christianity.”

Bargeman asserts that many Christian rituals and beliefs, specifically Roman Catholic ones, may have come from ancient Egyptian tradition. Her book juxtaposes the Bible with the Egyptian sacred text, The Book of the Dead, using specific themes and ceremonial practices to argue that Christianity directly evolved from the Egyptians.

One telling piece of evidence, Bargeman says, is the Christian use of the word “Amen,” which is a derivative of Amon, the Egyptian god of reproduction and life.

“For literally an eternity, human beings have been addressing their gods in the same way,” Bargeman said via e-mail.

Although others, most notably the religious scholar and theological historian Martin A. Larson, have made the same connection between Christianity and ancient Egyptian myths, most Christians are unaware of the similarities. While there are many clues to suggest Christianity’s roots can be traced to Greek, or Hellenic times, which began about 300 years before Christ’s birth during the development of Judaism, stories about Egyptian influences and other perceived “pagan” legends make some Christians uneasy.

“The reason for such denial is that Christianity is always presented as the only true religion, the only way to salvation, and as such, it could not have borrowed anything from a religion they have dubbed heathen or pagan,” Harrison Ola Akingbade, an Anglican Christian himself, wrote in the foreword of Bargeman’s book.

Bargeman first recognized the correlation between Christendom and Egyptian history when she heard a college professor suggest that Christianity was rooted in a ritual more ancient than popular culture believed. The story of Adam and Eve’s fall from grace, for example, has correlations to the Egyptian legend of Re and Sekhmet, another couple prideful in the face of God who punished them for their sins.

Other links between Egyptian religious practice and Christianity include the Trinity. When Christians say “In the name of the Father, the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” they mean, according to Bargeman, “in the name of Khnum-Atum/Aten-Re-Ptah, Osiris-Horus, and of Min/Amen.”

Not quite as catchy, but the ancient Egyptian gods assumed the same identities — father, son and spirit — that Christians worship.

Akingbade, an African scholar who discussed the Egyptian and Christian correlations as an undergraduate student in Nigeria, said among scholars, these similarities are nothing new.

“We’ve been talking about this forever,” he said. “Instead of talking about it in classes like I did, [Bargeman] made sense of it.”

Others, however, argue that not even the Greeks and Romans had much influence on Christianity, and that an attempt to bring the ancient Egyptian into the discussion is misguided. Larry Hurtado, professor of the New Testament at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland, considers the Egyptian influence on Christianity trifling.

“The most immediate culture or matrix is that of Palestinian-Jewish people of that time and setting,” Hurtado said in an e-mail. “Identifiably Egyptian influence is negligible.”

Bargeman’s thesis has already been exhausted, Hurtado said.

“This is actually quite a tiresome aspect of being a scholar in my field, that books keep appearing with the author and uninformed readers breathlessly announcing its radicality and novelty, when time after time it is simply a re-tread of an idea or claim refuted long ago,” Hurtado said.

But despite the challenges from some historians, including those who take issue with Bargeman’s interpretations of some Egyptian symbols, she said she has received little criticism from Christians themselves.

“If you are a firm believer in Christ, then use the Egyptian religion as a modifier for what you currently believe,” she said. “Perhaps you can use the story of the eternal regeneration of Khepri — a baby and a god in one unified state of constant reawakening — at Christmas, and relate it to your Christian ceremonies. Or you can watch a beautiful heron, lake side, fly up to the sky, carrying with it the wistful idea of our soul-ba as Benu-bird, the heron-esque spirit.”

Although Bargeman’s thesis has been debated by Egyptologists for some time now, Akingbade said Bargeman’s book is important to understanding and acknowledging Egyptian history. He has purchased several copies for his Christian friends in Africa.

“Most of my friends said it was really good,” Akingbade said. “It’s a contribution to scholarship.”
 
Utterly preposterous and complete tautology. For example, the following two conclusions do not agree with each other:

"Astrology has played a major role in society since the beginning of civilization, and maybe even before that... However, a closer look shows that the foundations for astrology were laid much earlier than that, and the Egyptians had much to do with this."

"The beginnings of actual astrology can be seen during the Old Babylonian period, during the second millennium."

What is the objection again? All this snippet indicates is that it originated in mesopotamia and that the egyptians had a hand in it's development...if you read the article closely this discrepancy would have been made clear.

The link does absolutely nothing to actually connect the ancient Sumerians and Babylonians in any kind of linear or cultural fashion as being influenced by Egypt. It would be impossible for them to do so, because those civilizations interacted in only one notable fashion: fighting. The people of Mesopotamia dealt primarily with the Mediterranian and Indus River Valley peoples, both with trade and, in various periods, fighting invasions. That is, when they weren't fighting each other-- Mesopotamia was extremely divided for long periods. The dynasties of Egypt were focused more on North and Central Africa, where their people originated. The only exception was the Hyksos 'invasion' and rule, which would actually lend more argument against claims of an Egyptian astrological origin, since these people from Canaan and the Indus River Valley wound up imposing their own religious mythologies on the Egyptians, not the other way around.

No one claimed egyptian origin for astrology...if you were reading these instead of glancing over them for rebuttal points it would be apparent to you. Interestingly (and predictably), though, your own link does go far enough to contradict your attempts to link the different mythologies from separate civilizations in the course of its "explanation" by pointing out:

"The various personalities and domains of these gods changed with time and change of rulership."

Whoops. Guess you missed that in your earnest. :)

I love how you can take what has been stated to you and turn it around as if you were the one who drew this conclusion in this debate.


Except that the linear link you are describing doesn't exist. Just to remind you from your previous link: "The various personalities and domains of these gods changed with time and change of rulership."

It's not a straight line, as we have already, and repeatedly stated..it's an evolution of various idea's melding together and taking on a life of their own.

I also feel the need to point out that you've shifted from claiming an Egyptian origin in this quote to a more-correct-but-still-not-quite-right claim of Babylonian origin. It's nice to see that either I'm getting through to you a little bit or my constant challenges to your claims are now pointing you to information that is altering your original assertions...

What were my original assertions? Did I assert anything except the general idea that the cultures in the region in question might have interacted enough to influence the ultimate outcome of religion?

You come across as much more original and educated about a subject when you can put things in your own words. Just an observation.

I'll keep that in mind.

If it's a link-war you want, though:
  • http://lds-blahblahblahblahblahblah...ahblahou might find it interesting. :) [/LIST


  • Whatever man, you don't even read them anyway.


    Wow. So, you're basically telling me to "step back" from all of those troublesome details like the factual historical data, cultural contexts and obstacles for transmission of ideas (like geography or language)... you know, all of those pesky things that clearly point out just how wrong you are with your broad over-generalizations and assertion of significance to unrelated criteria?

    What I am telling you is to quit asserting that there is no way that any of these civilizations in question would have affected each others cultural religious development. BECAUSE THEY DID! Did we all just hatch from eggs on this planet in our present locations or did we gradually migrate around the world taking bit's and pieces of various cultures with us?

    Can I ask you if you are honestly taking me seriously at all? I mean, if you are completely unwilling to take me seriously and actually consider that I just might have equal or greater study on the subjects we're talking about here, then what is the point of discussing this with me? I certainly wouldn't be challenging your constantly-contradictory references to Wikipedia if I thought you weren't working from a source that has more depth of information and more thorough study. You did, by the way, allude to having studied this kind of topic (history? archaeology? religion? astrology?) for years. I wouldn't be continuing to challenge your assertions if I did not mean to give you the opportunity to actually display these years of study. Instead, you're telling me to "step back" and not look at any contextual data? Are you joking?

    This is useless. You are unable to see the other side of the argument because you blinded by your rightness. I take what you say seriously, and then argue because I happen to know for a fact that modern civilization wouldn't be what it is if it wasn't for what happened before...haven't you ever taken an introdcutory sociology course?

    Before you answer, though: to reply to your "mythos travels and evolves with the people" comment-- while it is heartening to see you are now questioning the order in which the civilizational origins were placed, you're still burdened by some significant flaws. Myths didn't "travel" and "evolve" in any manner like you have, up to this point, described or asserted.

    That funny, I haven't made any actual assertions about the course of religious evolution I have just stated that it evolved, and that there are correlations in the cultures that support the theory that as human civilzation evolved and interacted so did religious beliefs.


    They definitely didn't do so in the manner that is described in the film Zeitgeist. Lastly, you need to get off this "astrology played a significant role" assertion because it is unsupportable without the tautology of using astrology as a reference. Astroomy was an influence, I would agree, but you have already done me the service of showing through one of your Wikipedia links that astrology and astronomy are do not coincide with each other, despite both of them originating from patterns in the stars.

    Astrology played a heavy role in the the development of mythos. These mythos have been absorbed and transformed variously throughout many cultures...as has been stated....as is supported by an credible historian.

    I really must give you credit for your tenacity, but I wonder if you realize how often you are asking me to judge only from the specific examples you give under only their own interpretation, without context, at the exclusion of the thousands of years of mythological history that do not coincide with your assertion at all and, in some places, actually outright contradict them.

    Again what was my exact assertion? I brought up specific examples for the purpose of providing an example...period.

    This is why attempting to link two unrelated civilizations by claiming similarities that require great leaps of interpretation are not only summarily dismissed in the scholarly world as being without merit, but are indicative of someone who is working from complete ignorance to the subject in the first place.

    You accuse me of ignorance while recycling the basic premise of my argument back to me...thats reeeeal amusing let me tell you.

    I understand what you are maintaining.

    No, you obviously don't.
 
http://atheism.about.com/b/a/123861.htm
Ancient Egypt and Judaism

What is the relationship between Egyptian religion and ancient Judaism? There was a time when the links were being explored by scholars, with many thinking that Egypt was at one point a strong influence on the Hebrews. Today the connections are generally ignored - but that may change.

Borrowing by one culture from another is a natural part of intellectual growth, and the fact that the process works both ways only serves to emphasise its fundamental truth. Egyptian words and metaphors translated into Hebrew can be paralleled by influences operating in reverse -- Hebrew words and names which have passed into the Ancient Egyptian language. However, by far the largest and most persuasive mass of evidence clearly indicates the primacy of the longer and more enduring civilisation of Egypt. There were contacts between Egypt and the Syria-Palestine region as early as the Middle Kingdom, around 2000 BC, when Egypt exercised economic, if not political, domination over the Levant. It is in this period that the migration of the Hebrew patriarchs to and from Egypt belong (Gen. 12:10ff). Contacts increased during the New Kingdom, especially following the conquests of Thutmose III, the creator of a vast Egyptian empire. Thutmose went to war regularly every summer and returned to Egypt around the end of September. The "Annals of Thutmose III" which are inscribed on the outer wall of the sanctuary at Karnak give details of the cities and tribes subdued in the course of his military campaigns. Contacts between Egypt and the Hebrew people increased during the so-called Period of Decline that followed the New Kingdom. David, a member of the Edomite royal house, fled to Egypt and was given political asylum by an unnamed Pharaoh (1 Kings 11: 14-22). Solomon married an Egyptian princess (1 Kings 3:1) and the palace he constructed for her was of Egyptian design; he also patterned his scribal schools on those of Egypt. No wonder that such a large number of Egyptian loan words, phrases and intellectual ideas should be preserved in the Old Testament, along with a large number of idiomatic expressions, and two Egyptian units of measure. It is very implausible that Egyptian religious beliefs and practices had no influence on ancient Judaism at all. Egypt was one of the most powerful cultures in the region and exercised widespread influence. The real question would seem to be just how extensive the influence was and how much of what is currently regarded as "Jewish" may have roots in ancient Egypt.
 

Back
Top Bottom